Acting Police Inspector-General Gilbert Masengeli.
When the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) moved to court on August 23 seeking orders to compel the police to produce three men allegedly abducted four days earlier, the court was satisfied that the case was urgent.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi, who handled the case, directed the police to charge Bob Micheni Njagi and brothers Jamil and Aslam Longton or produce their bodies if they were dead.
Three days later, the LSK was back in court stating that the police were yet to comply with the directive.
This time, LSK asked the court to summon the acting Inspector General of Police Gilbert Masengeli to explain why the application for habeas corpus was yet to be complied with.
Then started the summons that ended up with the sentencing of Mr Masengeli last week, to six months imprisonment for contempt of court.
Before Justice Mugambi imposed the sentence, the officer in charge of the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Kitengela Joseph Indeke filed an affidavit in court, seeking to absolve the police of claims of abducting the three men.
The court, however, rejected the affidavit or even the explanation by a State counsel on the position of the police on the missing three.
Justice Mugambi insisted that Mr Masengeli must appear in person to explain the whereabouts of Njagi, Jamil and Aslam.
In the affidavit, Mr Indeke explained that a report on the disappearance of the Longton brothers was made by Abdul Razack and Sally Matete on August 19, the day they were allegedly abducted.
The officer said it was reported that the Longton brothers were abducted and bundled into a vehicle by unknown persons and that they were only able to capture the three numbers of the plate of the white Subaru.
As for Njagi, Mr Indeke said the report was made by his father Frank Njagi on August 21. “Following the said reports, a circulation signal was dispatched to all the police stations countrywide in an effort to trace them,” he said.
The officer added that inquiry files were also opened and the investigations were still ongoing. He also said that the police had requested call log data of the three missing men from the crime research and intelligence bureau, to help with the investigations.
“That efforts to trace the reportees to record their further statements have unfortunately borne no fruit hence adversely affecting and delaying the ongoing investigations,” he said.
Mr Indeke maintained that the three were not abducted by the police they were not “persons of interest” in any investigations and the police had no reason for arresting them.
The detective said there is no evidence that the three men were arrested and detained by the police and the onus of proving the claim lay with the LSK.
Mr Masengeli disobeyed seven court summons before Justice Mugambi found him guilty of contempt of court on September 9. The court then directed Mr Masengeli to appear before him on September 13 for sentencing but he still failed to turn up.
In the ruling, the judge said the failure to comply with the court summons was a willful disobedience of the authority of the court.
In a statement on Monday, September 16, Mr Masengeli said his responsibilities as the Inspector General of Police, to secure the nation, require the office holder to attend operational meetings virtually the entire day at different locations.
He said that in a bid to comply with the court orders, he assigned the Deputy IG- Kenya Police Eliud Langat to attend Court on his behalf on September 9.
“It is not clear why the Court insisted on the IG attending to this matter in person, yet an equally senior officer had been availed by the Service,” he said in a statement.
He maintained that the issues arising in the matter in court were not personal to him and could have been effectively handled by any officer of the Service.
Meanwhile, Mr Masengeli has moved to the Court of Appeal seeking to quash the sentence imposed on him by Justice Mugambi.
In the appeal, the acting Inspector General of Police said the judge made the decision without any hearing at all, on the issue of contempt of court.
“The said decision to find in contempt of court for failing to comply with the learned judge’s habeas corpus order dated 23rd August, 2024 was made with any regard to the affidavit evidence adduced before court at the material time,” he said in an affidavit.
He said the court attendance did not require him to appear personally. “That the superior court’s decision condemned me unheard, grossly violating my non-derogable right to fair trial as provided under Article 25 of the constitution,” he added.
Mr Masengeli pleaded with the court to urgently hear his appeal saying the High Court judge gave him a grace period of seven days, which expires on September 20. He said sending him to jail would render his appeal useless.
