We're loading the complete profile of this person of interest including their biography, achievements, and contributions.
Judge of the Supreme Court of Kenya
Public Views
Experience
Documented career positions
Justice Smokin C. Wanjala (born 22 June 1960) is a Kenyan jurist currently serving as a Judge of the Supreme Court of Kenya. He holds an LL.B (Hons) from University of Nairobi, a Diploma in Law from the Kenya School of Law, an LL.M from Columbia University, USA, and a PhD in Law from the University of Ghent, Belgium. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, he served for nearly two decades as a lecturer and senior lecturer at the University of Nairobi (1986-2004) and later as Assistant Director of the Kenya Anti‑Corruption Commission (KACC) from October 2004 to 2009.
Doctorate in Law (PhD) – University of Ghent, Belgium.
Authored numerous academic publications in law, human rights and governance, and contributed to major research projects, including the Ndung’u Commission on Illegally Acquired Land.
Served as member of the Judicial Service Commission (2011-16) representing Supreme Court judges and chaired its Human Resources & Administration Committee.
Appointed as Judge of the Supreme Court of Kenya in 2011 and has served since then, including prominent roles in judiciary oversight and elections-related committees.
His role on the Supreme Court bench during highly charged election petitions (including the 2017 presidential election challenge) placed him in the spotlight of public and media criticism, as the judiciary’s independence and integrity were tested under intense political pressure
Some commentators have pointed to the pace of land-law reforms and implementation of the Ndung’u Commission recommendations (which he helped compile as Joint Secretary) as slower than anticipated, raising questions about follow-through on landmark land-governance reports. (Public commentary only.)
Appointed Presidential recipient of the Chief of the Order of the Burning Spear (CBS) in recognition of public service.
His academic and judicial insistence on integrity and transparency has occasionally drawn criticism from political actors who assert that judicial activism may overstep separation of powers; no formal disciplinary action has been taken.
