The National Police Service (NPS) has responded to accusations made by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) regarding the alleged intimidation and withdrawal of the security detail assigned to High Court Judge Justice Lawrence Mugambi.
Many Kenyans, including legal experts, activists, and social media users, have rejected acting IG Gilbert Masengeli's explanation, viewing it as an attempt to undermine judicial independence.
Recommended articles
In a press release dated September 16, 2024, the Acting Inspector General of Police, Gilbert Masengeli, refuted claims of retaliatory action after being sentenced to six months in prison for contempt of court.
Masengeli said that the security reassignment was a routine operational decision, not an act of retaliation.
He added that the officers assigned to Justice Mugambi were recalled for mandatory training and that suitable arrangements had been made to ensure the judge's safety.
"The IG has accorded the Judiciary, like other arms of government, the requisite protection without favour or discrimination," the statement reads.
Masengeli asserted that the reassignment of security details falls under the independent command of the Inspector General as per Article 245 of the Constitution, with no external interference allowed in such decisions.
The IG, according to the statement, is responsible for the security of all Kenyans, and the reassignment of officers is based on operational needs and security assessments.
Masengeli stated that no individual, other than President William Ruto,Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, and Retired President Uhuru Kenyatta, is legally entitled to personal security detail.
Kenyans have expressed widespread outrage on social media following the IG's statement.
Many Kenyans, including legal experts, activists, and social media users, have rejected the explanation, viewing it as an attempt to undermine judicial independence.