For 26 years, Stephen Njoroge Mburu carried a secret too painful to tell.
Arrested without warning, stripped of his dignity, and locked in a pitch-dark cell deep within the Nyayo House torture chambers, he emerged broken; physically, emotionally and spiritually.
Now, decades later, a fresh breeze of justice has begun to blow.
On May 9, 2025, the Court of Appeal overturned a High Court ruling that had denied Mburu compensation, despite clear findings that his constitutional rights had been violated.
Justices Gatembu Kairu and Weldon Korir found that the earlier court had erred by ignoring the reason for Mburu’s long silence: fear.
His abductors had warned him to stay quiet or face worse consequences.
From the cold, cement floors of a torture chamber to the quiet courage it took to speak out, Mburu’s journey is now part of Kenya’s unfolding reckoning with its painful past.
The appellate court has not only affirmed his suffering—it has reopened the path to justice.
Abducted in broad daylight
Stephen Mburu was an Assistant Manager at one of the banks when, on May 10, 1991, two plainclothes police officers stormed his office and arrested him in the presence of his branch manager.
He had ignored a cryptic phone call two days earlier instructing him to meet someone named “Kennedy Vietnam from Ulinzi.”
That decision set in motion a nightmarish ordeal.
After his arrest, Mburu was briefly held at Kilimani Police Station before being blindfolded, driven around in circles, and finally taken to the infamous Nyayo House torture chambers.
“Naked... in total darkness”
What followed was a chilling account of brutality.
“I was brought into a small, dark room with no lights. They ordered me to hand over my jacket (holding the bank’s keys), tie, belt, watch, shoes, socks, even my wedding ring,” Mburu narrated in court.
“They threw to me a small, thin, old mattress as my bed. Left alone in a small, dark, cold room, I kept wondering whether what I was experiencing this day was real.”
The torture intensified as he was later stripped completely naked, denied food and water, and forced to sleep on the cold concrete floor, exacerbated by air-conditioning meant to inflict further discomfort.
“They told me they would return and pour cold water six inches on the floor... I was left there, absolutely naked, the way I came out of my mother's womb, standing on a cold floor, in total darkness, and the air conditioner appeared to be exacerbating the bad situation by pumping cold air into the small room,” he narrated his ordeal.
“Hungry and thirsty, I kept standing there wondering just what was going on. Tired of standing on feet, I stood on my knees, then on both my knees and hands; and finally, I had no choice but to lie down on the cold floor. The cold penetrated deep into my bones. Although they did not pour water as they had stated, the extreme cold and hunger caused severe discomfort.”
Silent suffering and intimidation
After almost two weeks of torment, he was abruptly released—dumped at a Jogoo Road bus stop, handed five shillings for fare, and told to go home.
A week later, one of the officers who had interrogated him approached him at work.
The officer warned him against revealing to anyone what had happened to him, which filled him with “renewed fear of the police and therefore kept silent on the matter.”
His wife, Joyce Wangui Mburu, also testified, recounting the family's anguish during his disappearance as she went from one police station to another, desperately searching for him.
A case dismissed
In 2017, over two decades after the ordeal, Mburu filed a constitutional petition seeking redress.
In a judgment dated January 18, 2019, a High Court judge acknowledged that Mburu’s constitutional rights had indeed been violated but dismissed the petition solely on grounds of delay.
The judge relied on a precedent case holding that Mburu failed to explain the 26-year delay in seeking justice.
The state, represented by the Attorney General and the Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Interior, did not present any witnesses or evidence to counter Mburu’s claims.
Their legal team argued that the delay prejudiced a fair trial and accused Mburu of attempting to enrich himself through abuse of the court process.
A landmark appeal
Mburu appealed, arguing that the delay was caused by fear and threats of retaliation.
His lawyer stressed that constitutional rights are not extinguished by time and that his client had lived in terror for over two decades.
The appellate judges agreed. Justice Gatembu Kairu, delivering the leading judgment, said:
“The statement by the learned judge that the appellant did not explain why the petition was filed in 2017 is not entirely accurate... He explained that a week after his release, one of the interrogators warned him to keep silent, instilling renewed fear that persisted due to the prevailing political environment.”
Kairu added that the High Court was wrong in failing to consider Mburu’s explanation in his witness statement and oral testimony.
He noted that the delay, while lengthy, was understandable given the context of intimidation and systemic repression.
“There was an explanation which the learned Judge did not at all consider. It is not apparent that the appellant was, in this case, ‘riding on a mischief’,” he stated.
“I would award the costs of the appeal to the appellant (Mburu)”.
Justice Korir concurred fully with Kairu’s judgment.
Dissenting voice
However, not all judges agreed. In a dissenting opinion, Justice W Karanja sided with the High Court, holding that the explanation offered for the delay lacked credibility.
“I am not persuaded that the explanation is plausible, let alone sufficient to explain the delay of 26 years,” Karanja said, dismissing the fear claim as vague and unsupported by medical or professional documentation.
The judge further argued that the claim lacked corroboration from key witnesses, such as the bank manager and that no medical reports were submitted to prove the physical and psychological injuries claimed.
“It is not sufficient for one to sleep on his rights and wake up one day and say he did not come to court because he was afraid, and does not clearly say what he was afraid of, what he was threatened about,” Justice Karanja said.
A case remitted for compensation
The appellate court ultimately ruled in Mburu’s favour, setting aside the High Court’s decision and ordering that the case be returned to a different judge at the High Court solely for assessment of damages.
“I would remit the matter back to the High Court, before a Judge other than Mwita, J (trial judge) for the purpose only of assessing damages payable to the appellant,” Justice Gatembu declared.
Though the court did not immediately determine the amount of compensation, it granted costs of the appeal to Mburu.
A step toward transitional justice
The ruling is likely to have far-reaching implications for similar cases involving victims of torture, arbitrary detention, and other abuses by state security forces during Kenya’s darker political chapters.
Quoting from a 2023 Supreme Court judgment, the Court of Appeal emphasised that transitional justice claims are “context sensitive” and must be considered with an appreciation of past systemic repression.
“The need to confront and silence the ghosts of past wrongs or historical injustices was relevant in the Kenyan context,” Kairu said.
“Victims of such abuses were never granted an opportunity to obtain redress and justice during that period.”
As Kenya continues to reckon with its turbulent political past, the courts have once again affirmed that justice delayed can still be justice served.
