Nairobi — Chief Justice Martha Koome has faulted the Director of Public Prosecutions’ (DPP) decision to cite her earlier remarks in support of terrorism charges filed against protesters involved in Kenya’s recent anti-tax demonstrations. In a statement issued Wednesday, Koome said her comments after visiting the fire-damaged Kikuyu Law Courts on June 26 were focused only on that incident and should not be misinterpreted as a blanket endorsement of terrorism-related charges against demonstrators.
“The statements I made were in direct response to the attack on the Kikuyu Law Court,” CJ Koome clarified. “They were based on a security briefing received on-site and were not meant to apply to any other protests or individuals.”
Her response follows Monday’s move by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to quote her description of the Kikuyu arson as “an act of terrorism.” The ODPP had used her words and Kenya’s Prevention of Terrorism Act to argue that some violent acts during recent protests meet the legal threshold for terrorism offenses.
CJ Martha Koome said her remarks were never intended to justify prosecutorial decisions. CJ Koome specified that her comment on the Kikuyu incident referred to a targeted attack carried out by non-residents allegedly brought in to destroy court infrastructure.
“I stated that the destruction was not carried out by local residents or peaceful protesters,” CJ Koome said. “The attackers came from outside Kikuyu, intending to destroy public property.”
The Chief Justice emphasized that decisions to investigate or prosecute must rely on credible evidence not on public commentary, including her own. “The independence of investigative and prosecutorial institutions is guaranteed under the Constitution. That independence must be exercised with integrity and fairness.”
CJ Koome also reaffirmed the Judiciary’s obligation to uphold rights protected by law. “Everyone who appears in court, regardless of the charge, will receive a fair trial. That is not optional. It is a constitutional guarantee.”
The ODPP’s decision to pursue terrorism charges against individuals arrested during the June and July protests has sparked public concern and criticism from civil society groups, legal experts, and lawmakers. Protesters had taken to the streets in opposition to proposed tax hikes in the Finance Bill 2025, which has since been withdrawn by President William Ruto.
The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) and other watchdog groups have raised alarms over the broad use of anti-terror laws against civilians, arguing it undermines freedom of assembly and protest.
While the Judiciary has yet to rule on the legitimacy of the charges, Koome’s clarification distances the country’s top judicial officer from the prosecutorial approach, reinforcing the principle of impartiality in Kenya’s justice system.
About the Author
