Kenya’s efforts to expand community-based dispute resolution are facing funding shortages, public mistrust and a deep-rooted tendency to take disagreements to court, a Judiciary official has said, warning that the challenges are limiting access to alternative ways of settling disputes across the country.
Deputy Registrar Atieno Ogolla, who serves at the National Steering Committee on the Implementation of the Alternative Justice Systems Policy (NaSCI-AJS) National Secretariat, said the Judiciary was working to promote Alternative Justice Systems (AJS) as a way of helping Kenyans resolve suitable disputes without going through lengthy court proceedings.
Speaking on Radio Generation on Tuesday, Ogolla said many disagreements could be settled through mediation, negotiation and reconciliation, but public attitudes towards litigation remained a major obstacle to wider adoption of the approach.
“One of the challenges is, you know, as Kenyans, we are very litigious. Litigious means we like taking each other to court over a small issue.” Ogolla said.
She explained that limited funding and low public awareness had also slowed the rollout of AJS, with the initiative yet to be launched in more than half of Kenya’s 47 counties.
“The second challenge I would say is funding. The work of AJS, maybe I could say it's fairly a bit new, and most people are still trying to learn what AJS is. So we have not yet reached half of the 47 counties in terms of launching the AJS in all the counties,” she said.
Ogolla further pointed to doubts among members of the public about whether community-based dispute resolution can deliver fair outcomes, saying greater awareness and trust were necessary for more Kenyans to embrace the process.
Alternative Justice Systems offer a way of resolving suitable disputes outside the usual court process. They use methods such as mediation, negotiation, reconciliation and community-led discussions, sometimes involving elders who help the parties reach an agreement.
The approach builds on traditional methods that communities have used to settle disagreements for generations, while requiring those processes to respect the Constitution, the law and the rights of everyone involved.
Kenya’s Alternative Justice Systems Policy provides a framework for bringing these methods into the wider justice system. It aims to make justice easier to access, particularly for people who face financial difficulties, long distances to court stations or other barriers that make formal legal proceedings difficult.
The Constitution supports the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Article 48 requires the state to ensure access to justice for all, while Article 159 recognises methods including reconciliation, mediation and traditional dispute resolution, provided they comply with constitutional requirements.
Ogolla said such approaches could help address the difficulties faced by Kenyans who cannot easily access formal courts.
She cited a study by the Hague Institute for Law, which she said found that more than 60% of Kenyans could not access formal courts.
According to Ogolla, community-based processes could help bridge this gap by offering people another way to address disputes without immediately turning to litigation. However, she stressed that the methods used must be fair and protect the rights of all parties.
Ogolla is also the author of From Tradition to Modernity: The Role of ADR in African Justice Systems, a book that examines the place of alternative dispute resolution in African justice systems.
She identified debt recovery, family disagreements and efforts to reconcile estranged parties among the matters that could be considered for alternative resolution, depending on the circumstances.
For instance, someone seeking repayment of a debt could approach community elders to help negotiate an agreement with the person who owes the money, rather than immediately filing a case in court.
Family disputes could also benefit from the approach, particularly where parents have disagreements or have become estranged. In suitable cases, community structures can help open communication and encourage reconciliation, while taking into account the circumstances and interests of any child involved.
Ogolla said some disagreements could be resolved through an apology, an admission of wrongdoing or an agreed way forward, avoiding the need for lengthy court battles.
However, she emphasised that AJS must not be used to deny anyone justice or bypass the law. Participation must be voluntary, each side must have an opportunity to be heard, and any agreement reached must respect constitutional protections.
Serious offences, including sexual offences against children, cannot simply be handled through community agreements as a substitute for the legal process.
Alternative Justice Systems can also be used alongside the formal court process. Judges and magistrates can identify suitable cases and refer them for alternative resolution, giving parties an opportunity to settle their differences outside a courtroom.
Where the parties fail to reach an agreement, the matter can return to court for further proceedings.
The Judiciary is preparing to hold Alternative Justice Week from October 26 to 30, 2026, in a move aimed at increasing public understanding of the initiative and encouraging the use of appropriate dispute-resolution methods.
Ogolla said judicial officers had been asked to review cases handled at their respective stations and identify those that could be resolved through AJS.
Members of the public have also been encouraged to visit their nearest court station to find out whether their disputes are suitable for the process.
The planned activities come as the Judiciary seeks to widen the use of alternative dispute resolution while addressing the financial and public awareness challenges slowing its expansion.
Ogolla said broader public education, adequate funding and confidence in the fairness of community-based processes would be essential to extending AJS to more counties.
The initiative is intended to give Kenyans more options for resolving disputes without lengthy court proceedings, while preserving their right to seek justice through formal courts whenever alternative methods are unsuitable or fail to produce an agreement.