The
prosecution has urged the Kibera Law Courts to detain three activists for 21
more days, arguing that the extended period is necessary to determine whether
the individuals are legitimate protesters or part of criminal elements that
infiltrated the June 25, 2025, demonstrations.
State
Counsel Victor Owiti, supported by prosecutors, told the court that the line
between peaceful protestors and goons remains unclear, and investigations are
ongoing to establish where the three respondents fall.
Owiti said
the application for further detention is supported by an affidavit sworn by
Inspector George Karanja.
"To
establish between the lines of protesters and goons, we are asking for 21 days, and we suspect the respondents are in one of the groups," Owiti told the
court.
The
prosecution team further submitted that the Directorate of Criminal
Investigations (DCI) is still conducting investigations and that electronic
devices seized from the accused need to undergo forensic analysis.
According to
the prosecution, releasing the suspects at this stage would risk interference
with ongoing investigations and possible witnesses.
He admitted
that the three were arrested without warrants but justified the move by citing
their alleged involvement in felonies, which, under the law, do not require
arrest warrants.
Owiti
further told the court that the suspects attempted to flee when intercepted on
board a bus, reinforcing the state’s claim that they are flight risks.
The
prosecution on Monday proposed that each suspect be detained at a separate police
station to ensure a seamless investigation process.
They
recommended Muthaiga Police Station for the first respondent, John Mulingwa Nzau
alias Garang, Gigiri for the 2nd named Mark Amiani alias Generali, and for the
third, Francis Mutunge Mwangi alias Chebukati in Capitol Hill.
However, in
a strong rejoinder, defence lawyer Erick Muriuki, appearing for the Law Society
of Kenya, dismissed the prosecution’s arguments as punitive.
He said the
state had failed to show any credible evidence that the activists posed a
flight risk or intended to interfere with investigations.
"We
have scanned the application on human rights defenders' flight risk allegations, which are baseless because there must have been allegations, leave alone any
evidence, they were summoned and failed to appear," the defence lawyer
said.
The defence questioned why there were no prior summons issued before their arrest, insisting that the 21-day request was meant to silence human rights defenders rather than serve justice.
The lawyers
urged the court to reject the application, arguing that the prosecution had not
specified how much of the investigation remained pending.
They further
urged the court to release the respondents on free bond, if possible, adding
that they were willing to fully cooperate with any ongoing investigations.
The three
activists had been arraigned earlier under tight security, with a section of
supporters chanting “Viva comrades, viva!” outside the court.
The case
stems from the June 25 2025 protests that drew thousands to the streets to mark
the anniversary of the 2024 Finance Bill demonstrations.
