Justice Luka Kimaru urged the institutions involved specifically the Directorate of Criminal Investigations to ensure the probe passes the integrity test/FILE
NAIROBI, Kenya, Jul 12 – The High Court on Tuesday cautioned the detectives probing the murder of lawyer Willie Kimani, his client Josephat Mwenda and their cab driver Joseph Muiruri, against carrying out a bungled probe.
Justice Luka Kimaru urged the institutions involved specifically the Directorate of Criminal Investigations to ensure the probe passes the integrity test.
“We don’t want bungled investigations,” Justice Kimaru directed.
The judge also ruled that the CID boss Ndegwa Muhoro will present a full report of the probe on July 20th.
Muhoro must append his signature on the report, the Judge directed.
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) through its lawyer John Khaminwa, want the river where the bodies of the three were dumped, the area near Syokimau AP Camp and the village where their vehicle was found to be put under police surveillance.
The lawyer also urged the court to ensure any witness or a potential witness was put under protection before and during the hearing of the case.
“My Lord, as an agent of the law, I would also say that the suspects and the accused must continue to enjoy strong protection from the security personnel,” he stated, while making his submissions.
“The emotions are so high that the suspects and the accused persons in this matter would also be killed if they are set free. People are mourning everywhere over the departure of our deceased colleague.”
Further, the lawyer wanted the state to be compelled to make monthly payment to the families of the deceased, “pending the finalization of the suit. They need money.”
He argued that the court, “had a moral obligation to make an order that the family of the deceased persons be paid money monthly, pending the finalization of this matter.”
LSK also wants the court to order Safaricom to provide more phone data for the suspects and the victims since the case will largely depend on circumstantial evidence.
Among the information they want includes the names and identities of the phone numbers in question, as registered including their active and conditional divert call information.
Safaricom through their lawyer Stephen Kiptinness however want to be discharged from the proceedings.
But Kiptinness argued that Safaricom had already provided enough data, saying they had to also consider the right to privacy.
They however committed to provide any information required, at whatever stage, as the case proceeds.
The Law Society of Kenya however interjected saying that, “the right to privacy is not always absolute. It can be altered in making sure that justice is delivered.”
About The Author
