[2018] KEHC 10268 (KLR)
The court found no evidence that the Director of Public Prosecutions' recommendation to charge the petitioner was informed by discriminatory considerations or constituted an infringement of his constitutional rights. The petitioner's claim that he was being harassed for performing his duty was deemed a matter for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 10268 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Siyad Hassan Edo; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: Directorate of Criminal Investigations Department
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Homa Bay
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 16 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling
- Outcome
- petition dismissed for want of merit
- Judges
- DO Ohungo
- Legal Topics
- Fair Administrative Action, Right to Fair Trial, Abuse of Process, Discrimination, Prosecutorial Discretion
- 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
Siyad Hassan Edo
Petitioner
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
Directorate of Criminal Investigations Department
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the order to arrest and charge the petitioner infringed his constitutional rights.
- 2 Whether the DPP's recommendation to charge the petitioner was informed by discriminatory considerations.
- 3 Whether the petition was filed in bad faith and constituted an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no evidence that the Director of Public Prosecutions' recommendation to charge the petitioner was informed by discriminatory considerations or constituted an infringement of his constitutional rights. The petitioner's claim that he was being harassed for performing his duty was deemed a matter for the criminal trial, where such defenses could be raised. The court further noted that the choice to file the petition in Homa Bay, far from the locus of the events in Mandera, suggested bad faith and an abuse of the court process. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for want of merit.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed for want of merit
Orders
- The petition is dismissed for want of merit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT HOMA BAY
CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO.16 OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 22 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA 2010
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE FAIR ADMINISTRATION ACTION UNDER
ARTICLE 47 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA 2010
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE CONTRAVENTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND
FREEDOMS UNDER ARTICLES 2(1), 3(1), 10(2), 20(2), 22, 23,
24(1),25, 27(1), 28, 29,39, 48, 49, 165(3), 258 AND
259 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 123(1) PART 5 OF THE CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE CODE CAP 75 INHERENT JURISDICTION OF THE
HONOURABLE COURT & GENERAL PRINCIPLES
OF NATURAL JUSTICE & THE RULE OF LAW
BETWEEN
SIYAD HASSAN EDO......................................................PETITIONER
AND
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION.....1ST RESPONDENT
THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL........................2ND RESPONDENT
THE DIRECTORATE OF CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIONS DEPARTMENT.......................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. SIYAD HASSAN EDO (the petitioner) has sought for declaration that the Director of Public Prosecution’s (1st respondent) order by a letter ODPP/MAR/CR 1/1/14 to arrest and charge him with a felony is an infringement to his constitutional rights and the letter be declared a nullity.
2. He has enjoined the Hon. The Attorney General (2nd respondent) as the principal legal advisor to the government and representative of the national government in court or any other legal proceedings in which the government is a party by dint of Article 156of the Constitution.
3. He has also enjoined the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCIO) [3rd respondent] who reports to the Inspector General of Police.
4. The background to the matter is that sometime in the year 2015, JOSEPH OKOTH ANANGA (then the Officer Commanding Anti-Terrorist Police Unit [ATPU] Mandera released two terror suspects without entering their arrest or release in the police Occurrence Book [OB].
5. The petitioner immediately informed the County Criminal Investigating Officer (JOHN OTIENO) and the County Officer ATPU (NYALI MUNGA) about the unlawful release of the suspects.
6. It is the petitioner’s contention that the officer JOSEPH OKOTH, did not follow the required procedures in relation to the release and the County Criminal Investigating Officer JOHN OTIENO instituted an inquiry and appointed JEPHER MAINGI (then DCIO Mandera North) to immediately institute investigations into the matter, and upon completion of the investigation, a finding was made thatJOSEPH OKOTHwas responsible for the irregular release of suspects. Consequently the DPP advised that the saidJOSEPH OKOTHbe charged and indeed he was charged inMandera Case No.373 of 2017, in which the petitioner is a key witness.
7. However the 1st and 3rd respondents have now threatened to use police to arrest the petitioner on pretext that he aided and facilitated the commission of a felony, which make him feel harassed and intimidated.
8. Is there any evidence presented to the court suggesting that the recommendation by the DPP to have the petitioner charged for the offence was informed by discriminatory consideration? I find none. If as the applicant/petitioner says he merely did his duty and obeyed his senior, then that would obviously come out at the criminal trial.
9. What I can decipher is a panic reaction, and I wonder the mala fides in coming all the way from North Easter Province to Homa Bay to file this petition yet there are other High Courts within and near Mandera which could have handled this matter.
10. The entire petition reeks of bad faith and I will not delve further on it … in my view it lacks merit and is dismissed for want of merit.
Delivered and dated this 5th day of February, 2018 at Homa Bay
H.A. OMONDI
JUDGE