The wife of Arshad Sharif, a Pakistan journalist who was shot dead in October 2022 in Kenya, now wants a declaration made that the act by police officers to kill him was unlawful and unconstitutional.
In a petition filed at the High Court in Kajiado County, Javeria Siddique, the Kenya Union of Journalists (KUJ) and the Kenya Correspondents Association also want a declaration issued that the unlawful shooting of the journalist violated his right to life.
Sharif, a strident critic of Pakistan’s powerful military, was shot dead on October 23, 2022, and the National Police Service (NPS) said he was killed during a shootout with officers attached to the General Service Unit (GSU).
Sharif was a passenger in a Toyota Landcruiser (V8) KDG 200M when he was shot. The police claimed to have been trailing a different vehicle, a Mercedes Benz Sprinter van KDJ 700F, allegedly stolen from Pangani.
The Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), the Inspector General of Police, the Independent Policing and Oversight Authority (IPOA) and the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) are defendants in the case.
“A declaration does issue that the unlawful shooting to death of Arshad Sharif by the Kenyan police officers at Kajiado County, Kenya on 23 October 2022 violated his right to life under Article 26 of the Constitution; right to equal benefit and protection of the law under 12 of 14 Article 27; right to dignity under Article 28; and right to security of the person under Article 29 of the Constitution,” the petition filed in court yesterday read in part.
According to Dudley Ochiel, the advocate for Mr Sharif, there was a need for the court to issue a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to effective remedies as guaranteed by the constitution.
In addition, the lawyer argues that the failure to conduct an independent, prompt, and effective investigation and to commence a prosecution for the killing of Mr Sharif by Kenyan police officers further violates the positive obligation to investigate and prosecute violations of the Right to Life, torture, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
He asked the court to consequently issue a mandatory order compelling the respondents to conclude investigating, take disciplinary action, and charge in court the police officers who shot and killed the celebrated media personality.
“An order compelling the Respondents to supply to the Petitioners copies of all documents, files, reports, letters, electronic mail (email) or evidence, in any medium, including but not limited to films, photographs, videotapes, in their custody, possession relating to the shooting in question,” the lawyer said in the petition.
He also asked the court to issue an order directing the Attorney General to go ahead and issue a public apology, including an acknowledgement of the facts and acceptance of responsibility to the family of the deceased journalist within seven days.
Sharif died aged 49 and was an employed journalist who used his earnings to support his family. The court documents showed that he had two wives, Siddique and Somia Arshad, and five children.
In the petition, his lawyer said that there were four issues of determination, which include whether the respondents violated his right to life, whether the respondents subjected him to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and violated his right to dignity.
Thirdly, whether the respondents have delayed investigating and prosecuting the case, thus compounding the violation, and what would be appropriate reliefs.
In their submission, the AG and the IG said that the latter fully complied with IPOA during the investigations.
“Due to the nature of the case and since the law does not provide a time limitation period for handling reports made to the authority, it is our submission that the petitioners should exercise patience and let the organisations mandated, work on the case without interference,” the two offices said.
They further submitted that the use of lethal force for law enforcement is not allowed in the police department, and policies and legislations have been put in place under the Sixth Schedule of the National Police Service Act to guide officers.
“Further police officers who have been found to violate the said provisions always face disciplinary action by the institutions mandated to do the same,” they responded.
According to the submissions, the petitioners in the case had a premature petition, which has no merit. They also said that the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of relief.
“For the foregoing reasons the petitioner’s petition dated October 19, 2023, is devoid of merit and ought to be dismissed with costs,” the submissions further read.
