They came in robes and left in tatters. The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) interviews for the Court of Appeal have evolved from a recruitment exercise into a public flaying of the legal mind.

With 35 candidates fighting for a handful of slots, the stakes have never been higher. The Court of Appeal is the engine room of Kenyan jurisprudence, and the JSC, keenly aware of the public eye, has taken off the gloves. The questions ranged from the jurisprudential to the deeply personal, exposing the soft underbelly of some of the country’s top legal brains.

The Integrity Test

It wasn't just about case law. The Commissioners zeroed in on "lifestyle audits" and past judgments. One nominee was grilled for 45 minutes on a single land ruling delivered ten years ago, with Commissioners suggesting it reeked of external influence. Another was asked to explain wealth that seemed to outpace a judicial salary.

"The message is clear," says a senior counsel who watched the proceedings. "The JSC is terrified of another corrupt judge scandal. They are over-compensating by assuming every candidate is guilty until proven innocent."

• The Competence Gap: Shockingly, several candidates struggled with basic constitutional interpretations. The 2010 Constitution is now 16 years old, yet some nominees appeared stuck in the mindset of the old order.
• Communication Skills: The ability to write a coherent judgment was a key metric. The Commission openly criticized the "copy-paste" culture prevalent in the lower courts, demanding to know if the nominees were capable of original legal thought.

The Final Verdict

As the list is whittled down, the country waits. The men and women chosen here will decide the fate of elections, the legality of taxes, and the future of human rights. The JSC’s brutality is necessary; a weak Court of Appeal is a danger to the Republic.