Police in Lamu have distanced themselves from claims of disregarding a court order suspending night travel ban in the region.
Lamu County Police Commander Shadrack Ruto on Wednesday said that if a court order was issued for the Lamu-Witu-Garsen route night travel restrictions to be lifted, it was not directed to the security agencies on the ground but rather the head office in Nairobi.
On Tuesday, motorists blocked the highway at Minjila Junction protesting against the police, saying they have ignored the court order suspending the 6pm to 7am curfew on the route.
Last Thursday, the High Court in Garsen, Tana River County, issued conservatory orders suspending the continued enforcement of the curfew, pending the hearing and determination of the constitutional petition challenging their legality.
Lamu activists and youth leaders push for the lifting of the Lamu-Witu-Garsen road night travel ban in this photo taken on May 27, 2026.
Photo credit: Kalume Kazungu | Nation Media Group
Mr Ruto said any such communication to police officers must come from Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen and Inspector-General of Police Douglas Kanja. He urged residents to be patient and give security agencies ample time to deliberate and act on the matter.
“We were not served with any court orders directly. If the CS and IG communicate, we shall give them our observation concerning the situation on the ground. They will assess and see whether it’s okay to have the travel restrictions lifted,” he said.
Mr Ruto acknowledged that security on the Lamu-Witu-Garsen road has greatly improved in recent years.
“Our security agencies have done a tremendous job to ensure the security of travellers on the route is fully guaranteed. There have not been any terrorist attacks along the route in recent years,” he said.
“But we can’t move ahead to lift the ban and restore night travel fully just like that. We have scenarios where terrorists are spotted in some places, meaning the enemy is still within. Any changes surrounding travel arrangements on our route need to be done gradually, partially. There’s the idea to extend some hours of travelling at night.”
He further explained that the Lamu-Witu-Garsen route has no roadblocks as alleged but rather, segmented approaches by various security units to ensure the safety of travellers.
“Initially, buses were escorted by armed police. Today, we’ve shifted to having segmented security checks by various units and manning road sections,” said Mr Ruto.
A security insider who requested anonymity said that restricting hours on the highway is crucial as it gives security agencies time and space to gather intelligence, conduct general patrols and monitor suspicious activities in the high-risk zones of counties bordering Somalia.
“Civil rights organisations and locals might push for security reforms in these areas, but we can’t jeopardise citizens’ security,” said the officer.
Lamu human rights activist Mohamed Skanda speaks in Lamu on May 27, 2026.
Photo credit: Kalume Kazungu | Nation Media Group
Meanwhile, protesters issued a three-day ultimatum to have the night travel ban lifted as per the court orders.
Speaking to journalists in Lamu Town on Wednesday, they threatened to shut down all transport services along the route if the police did not lift the travel ban within three days. They also rejected the police's request for them to wait seven days for communication concerning the fate of the travel ban.
“We’re only giving them three days to implement the court order. Let them suspend the ban and allow night operations on the route or else we shall organise the mother of demonstrations and ensure a total shutdown of transport on the route,” said Mohamed Skanda, an activist.
A spot check by the Nation on Wednesday established that transport along the Lamu-Witu-Garsen route had resumed to normalcy with no cases of motorists blocking sections of the road.
The court orders followed a petition filed by 24 residents and activists who argued that the curfew imposed in 2017 was only authorised for 90 days and was never lawfully extended.
The petitioners maintained that the restrictions had crippled livelihoods, limited freedom of movement and exposed residents to arbitrary searches without a clear legal basis or public justification. The court issued the conservatory orders pending the hearing and determination of the petition filed on April 8.
