[2019] KEHC 9911 (KLR)
The court found that the application for witness protection was merited based on the affidavit and risk assessment forms provided. The judge was satisfied that the witnesses in Criminal Case No. 16/2019 faced credible threats and that protective measures were necessary to ensure their safety and the integrity of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 9911 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 12 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Order
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Witness Protection, In Camera Testimony, Redaction of Statements
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Republic
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the witnesses in Criminal Case No. 16/2019 should be granted protection under the Witness Protection Act.
- 2 Whether the witnesses should be allowed to testify in camera or closed sessions.
- 3 Whether the witness statements should be redacted before being supplied to the accused persons.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application for witness protection was merited based on the affidavit and risk assessment forms provided. The judge was satisfied that the witnesses in Criminal Case No. 16/2019 faced credible threats and that protective measures were necessary to ensure their safety and the integrity of the judicial process. Accordingly, the court granted orders for in camera testimony, redaction of witness statements, use of pseudonyms, and secure handling of the file, in line with the provisions of the Witness Protection Act and the relevant rules.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- A witness protection order is issued to witnesses in Criminal Case No. 16/2019 identified as EE2, EE3, EE4, EE5, EE6 and EE7 to testify in camera or closed sessions.
- An order is issued that the witness statements of the protected witnesses be redacted before being supplied to the accused persons.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
MISC. APPLICATION NO 12 OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF THE WITNESS PROTECTION ACT
IN THE MATTER OF THE WITNESS PROTECTION RULE, 2015 AND
IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION FOR ORDERS FOR WITNESS PROTECTION
REPUBLIC............APPLICANT
In Chambers on 21st February, 2019 Before Hon. A. Mabeya
O R D E R
This matter is coming up under certificate of urgency.
ITS HEREBY ORDERED
I have considered the application and the Affidavit in support. I have seen the Risk assessment forms and the contents thereof.
I am satisfied that the application is well merited.
Accordingly, I allow the application as follows: -
1. A witness protection order hereby issues to witnesses in Criminal Case No. 16/2019 identified as EE2, EE3, EE4, EE5, EE6 and EE7 and for them to testify in camera or closed sessions.
2. An order of witness protection issues that the witness statements of the protected witnesses be redacted before being supplied to the accused persons.
3. The six witnesses be and are hereby allowed to testify using Pseudo names
4. This file be kept under lock and key by the Deputy Registrar of this court at all times.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT ON THIS 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019
ISSUED AT MERU THIS 21st DAY OF February 2019
DEPUTY REGISTAR
MERU HIGH COURT