[2018] KEHC 8964 (KLR)
The court found that there was an obvious contempt of its orders and a deliberate attempt by State agencies to subvert the rule of law by failing to produce the applicant as directed. To determine the appropriate course of action, the court ordered the 2nd and 3rd respondents to swear affidavits explaining the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 8964 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Miguna Miguna; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Director of Criminal Investigations; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Interested Party: Law Society of Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 57 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Contempt and Directions
- Outcome
- Directions issued for affidavits and personal attendance to show cause for contempt; proceedings adjourned.
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Obedience to Court Orders, Judicial Authority, Rule of Law
- 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
Miguna Miguna
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Director of Criminal Investigations
Respondent
Inspector General of Police
Respondent
Law Society of Kenya
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Contempt and Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents disobeyed valid court orders requiring production of the applicant before the court.
- 2 Whether the conduct of the respondents amounts to contempt of court and subversion of the rule of law.
- 3 What directions should be issued to address the alleged contempt and ensure compliance with court orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was an obvious contempt of its orders and a deliberate attempt by State agencies to subvert the rule of law by failing to produce the applicant as directed. To determine the appropriate course of action, the court ordered the 2nd and 3rd respondents to swear affidavits explaining the circumstances under which the applicant was released to the Directorate of Immigration during the subsistence of a valid court order. The Director of Immigration was also directed to explain how he assumed custody of the applicant. The court further required the 2nd and 3rd respondents to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt. The matter was adjourned for...
Court Disposition
Directions issued for affidavits and personal attendance to show cause for contempt; proceedings adjourned.
Orders
- 2nd and 3rd respondents to swear affidavits explaining the applicant's release to the Directorate of Immigration.
- Director of Immigration to swear affidavit explaining assumption of custody of the applicant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.57 OF 2018
MIGUNA MIGUNA..............................................................................APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS.................1ST RESPONDENT
THE DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS….......2NDRESPONDENT
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE...........................3RDRESPONDENT
LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA...............................................INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
From the submission made, it is clear to this court that there is an obvious contempt of the orders of this court and a deliberate attempt by State agencies to subvert the Rule of Law in this country. Court orders once issued must be obeyed. For this court to make an appropriate determination on what course of action to take, it hereby directs the 2nd and 3rd Respondents (in person) to swear affidavits in regard to the circumstances under which the Applicant was released from their custody to the Directorate of Immigration during the subsistence of a valid court order requiring them to produce the Applicant before this court so that he could be dealt with in accordance with the law. The Director of Immigration, Maj Gen. (Rtd) Gordon O. Kihalangwa must swear an affidavit to indicate under what circumstances he assumed custody of the Applicant when he knew that he was under the custody of the court awaiting his release. The affidavits must be filed and served by Friday on 9th February 2018. The Applicant and the Interested Party have a right to file affidavits in response to the affidavits that shall be filed. Further, the 2nd Respondent Mr. George Kinoti and the 3rd Respondent Mr. Joseph Boinnet must further swear affidavits to show cause why they should not be punished in accordance with the Contempt of Court Act for disobeying the orders of this court. They shall be required to appear before this court in person on 15th February 2018 at 9. 00 a.m. to show cause. These proceedings are adjourned to that date. It is so ordered.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
L. KIMARU
JUDGE