A confrontation between the Judiciary and the National Police Service (NPS) is brewing after the sudden withdrawal of High Court Judge Lawrence Mugambi’s security detail. The move comes just days after the judge sentenced Acting Inspector General of Police Gilbert Masengeli to six months in prison for contempt of court.
Chief Justice Martha Koome on Monday the 16th condemned the withdrawal, terming it as an act of intimidation against the Judiciary. According to Koome, Justice Mugambi’s security personnel were disarmed and removed over the weekend, following the sentencing of the acting IG.
“A disturbing action was taken by the national police in the wake of the sentencing of the acting IG. The police officers assigned to Justice Mugambi were disarmed and subsequently withdrawn,” stated Koome, calling the action unconstitutional and in direct violation of Article 160, which protects judicial independence.
Koome emphasized that retaliatory actions against judicial officers are unacceptable and called on the NPS to immediately restore Judge Mugambi’s security. “The Judiciary will not bow to intimidation. We are committed to upholding the rule of law and will continue to protect the independence of our courts,” she said.
Judicial Decision Sparks Controversy
The withdrawal of security followed Judge Mugambi’s ruling on Friday the 13th, where he sentenced Masengeli to six months in prison after the police chief failed to comply with multiple court orders.
The judge had summoned Masengeli seven times to explain the whereabouts of three individuals — Bob Njagi, Jamil Longton, and Aslam Longton — who had disappeared during the anti-government protests led by the “Gen Z” movement on August 19, 2024. The men are alleged to have been abducted by police, a claim the police have not yet fully addressed.
Judge Mugambi issued a stern warning, stating that if Masengeli failed to present himself to the Commissioner General of Prisons within seven days, the sentence would be enforced. Mugambi, however, provided the police chief with an opportunity to avoid prison by appearing in court within that time frame.
Police Response: IG Defends Action
The National Police Service responded to the Judiciary’s accusations in a statement on Monday. Acting IG Masengeli asserted that the withdrawal of Mugambi’s security was routine and unrelated to the court ruling.
He explained that the two officers assigned to the judge had been reassigned for a VIP security training course, and alternative arrangements had been made to ensure the judge’s safety.
Masengeli further clarified that only the President, Deputy President, and retired Presidents are constitutionally entitled to personal security. “Other individuals are provided with security based on criteria set by the National Police Service, as determined by the Inspector General,” he said, adding that judges, by their position, do not automatically qualify for personal security.
Masengeli reiterated the NPS’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and assured the public that the judiciary’s safety would not be compromised.
Rising Concerns Over Judicial Independence
The timing of the security withdrawal has sparked concerns among legal experts, with many warning that it could undermine judicial independence and send a dangerous signal to the public. Chief Justice Koome’s strong condemnation reflects the growing tension between the two key arms of government.
“The act of withdrawing the security of a sitting Judge following a judicial decision that displeased certain authorities is deeply concerning. It sends a chilling message to the Judiciary and the public at large that those entrusted with upholding justice can be intimidated or retaliated against for their rulings,” said Koome.
Read also: Of Court Orders and Meat Wrappers
