Published on January 23, 2025 by Agencies for Kenya Online News
Last Updated on 2 years by Agencies for Kenya Online News
The Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja and Director of Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Muhammad Amin haved been ordered to avail themselves physically in court on Thursday, January 30, 2025.
The High Court in Nairobi has dismissed the request by Kanja and Amin to overturn earlier orders requiring their personal appearance in court on January 30, 2025.
Judge Chacha Mwita ordered the two to appear in person to explain the alleged abduction of three individuals in Mlolongo.
Justus Mutumwa, Martin Mwau, and Karani Muema, who have now been dubbed the ‘Mlolongo Three,’ were reportedly abducted in Mlolongo, Machakos County, alongside one Stephen Mbisi Kavingu, on December 16 and 17, 2024.
Their whereabouts remain unknown nearly five weeks after their disappearance, with police refuting reports suggesting their involvement in the incident.
The IG and DCI had sought to set aside the directive issued on January 13 saying they were not properly served with the court orders.
Justice Mwita on Thursday however said the duo was aware of the directive having received it electronically via email.
The Judge emphasized the importance of the safety of the three missing individuals and reiterated the need for the officers to personally appear in court.
“The applicants say they were not served with the orders and the application and were not aware of the orders. The respondents however say that they served by email. The two (IG and DCI) argued that they were never given an opportunity to be heard, that the court issued the orders without hearing them,” stated Justice Mwita.
“From the affidavit, service was done by email. The two were served through emails which they have disputed arguing that they are not confirmed email addresses. Public email address can be used for as long as it’s in use.”
He added: “I’m not persuaded that the email address used was not the confirmed email address or that he was not served. There’s no argument that the pleadings served to the two through the email were not received. The pleadings were received and that’s why they were represented in court.”
