[2024] KEHC 6765 (KLR)
The court found that the two NIS officers, as witnesses, faced a real risk to their safety if exposed to the public during testimony. The judge held that it is fair and just to allow them to give evidence in circumstances where they feel safe, especially given the sensitive nature of their work. The court was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 6765 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: ODPP; Respondent: Karisa Mae Mwaringa; Respondent: Lucky John Katongo; Respondent: Mwaringa Mae Mwaringa; Respondent: Japhet Kahindi Kazungu; Respondent: Richard Kahindi Menza
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E068 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Witness Protection
- Outcome
- application granted
- Judges
- SM Githinji
- Legal Topics
- Witness Protection, Evidence in Criminal Trials, National Security, Fair Trial Rights
- 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
ODPP
Applicant
Karisa Mae Mwaringa
Respondent
Lucky John Katongo
Respondent
Mwaringa Mae Mwaringa
Respondent
Japhet Kahindi Kazungu
Respondent
Richard Kahindi Menza
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Witness Protection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether NIS officers who are witnesses should be granted protection during the hearing to prevent public exposure.
- 2 Whether granting witness protection would prejudice the defence or delay the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the two NIS officers, as witnesses, faced a real risk to their safety if exposed to the public during testimony. The judge held that it is fair and just to allow them to give evidence in circumstances where they feel safe, especially given the sensitive nature of their work. The court was satisfied by the state's assurance that granting the protection would not delay the hearing and that the defence would not be prejudiced. The judge emphasized that the need to protect witnesses outweighed concerns about delay, particularly where the danger is not from the accused but from public exposure. Consequently, the application for witness protection was granted as prayed.
Court Disposition
application granted
Orders
- The three stated witnesses are to be placed under protection during the hearing of the case as sought.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
ODPP v Mwaringa & 4 others (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E068 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 6765 (KLR) (6 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 6765 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Malindi
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E068 of 2024
SM Githinji, J
June 6, 2024
Between
Odpp
Applicant
and
Karisa Mae Mwaringa
1st Respondent
Lucky John Katongo
2nd Respondent
Mwaringa Mae Mwaringa
3rd Respondent
Japhet Kahindi Kazungu
4th Respondent
Richard Kahindi Menza
5th Respondent
Ruling
1. I have gone through the application and the affidavit. Two of the witnesses are officers working with NIS. If they feel exposure to the public during the evidence adducing process will endanger their lives, it is only fair that they offer evidence in circumstances in which they feel safe. This won’t prejudice the defence in anyway. We know the circumstances under which NIS officers work and it’s unfair to expose them to identification by the public. The danger is not from the suspects and the fact that the suspect knows them does not therefore count.
2. We have been promised by the state that granting the orders won’t delay hearing in anyway as they will proceed on the first hearing date. The greater concern of defence which is delay is therefore sufficiently addressed.
3. The suspects are not endangered probably by the pendency of the matter as it could be on other issues. Though delay is abhorred, this should not be an issue to decline protection of a witness whom the state feels and the witnesses, that they need protection. Having said that I do order that the 3 stated witnesses be placed under protection during the hearing of the case, as sought. Application is granted as prayed.
RULING READ, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MALINDI THIS 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024…………………………………………………S.M. GITHINJIJUDGEIn the Presence of: -PARA 1. Mr Mouko for the Accused PersonsPARA 2. M/s Kambaga for the State(ODPP)Malindi HC Misc. Cr App NO.E068 of 2024 - Ruling Page 2