Deputy Inspector General of Police Gilbert Masengeli walked out of the High Court on Friday a humbled man after a public apology saved him from a six-month jail term he had been sentenced to for snubbing the court seven times.
Mr Masengeli, who is in charge of Administration Police and had been acting inspector-general of police until Douglas Kanja took over on Thursday, apologised to Justice Lawrence Mugambi and the entire Judiciary.
"I apologise to the court for the events that have transpired leading to the orders of this court. My Lord, I respect you for the good work that you do to uphold the rule of law. As a police officer, it is my duty to enforce court orders and ensure they are obeyed. I am deeply sorry," Mr Masengeli said.
And for what the court said came out as an apology from a “genuinely repentant man”, Justice Mugambi vacated his earlier decision, including the conviction.
“This court is convinced that Mr Masengeli regrets and is genuinely remorseful for the situation he finds himself in. It is not the intention of this court to punish a genuinely repentant man who has acknowledged his mistakes and offered an apology,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
His conduct in court, Justice Mugambi said, “has restored the dignity of the court and the due administration of justice.”
“The court is fully satisfied that the purging process has infused in his mind, or in the mind of the contemnor, Mr Masengeli, the obligation to respect and uphold the rule of law and the due administration of justice. The supremacy of the law has equally been vindicated,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
The case of the trio's disappearance has also been referred to Chief Justice Martha Koome for the constitution of a three-member bench.
"This matter is of great public interest and the petition raises substantial issues of law that require to be heard by an expanded bench. I therefore refer the matter to Chief Justice to appoint judges to hear, excluding me," Justice Mugambi ruled.
Mr Masengeli was represented in court by Attorney-General Dorcas Oduor, Solicitor-General Shadrack Mose and the Chairman of the National Assembly Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, George Murugara.
Also on his legal team were lawyers Cecil Miller and Steve Ogolla and State Advocates Emmanuel Bitta, Charles Mutinda and Wanjiku Mwangi.
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK), which was pushing for Mr Masengeli's conviction, was represented by its president Faith Odhiambo, former president Nelson Havi and lawyers Levi Munyeri, Bernard Atancha and Hosea Manwa.
Mr Munyeri and Mr Kabata said the LSK petition would not be abandoned but would be taken to the CJ to appoint a three-judge bench to hear it because dozens of people had been abducted and cannot be traced.
Mr Masengeli had earlier told the court that as far as he was concerned, investigations into the disappearance of the three were still ongoing to establish who had abducted them .
"I don't know them; I knew them when it was reported at Kitengela Police Station and circulated by the OCS countrywide that they had been abducted," Mr Masengeli said.
Mr Masengeli's lawyers told the court that his failure to appear in court was due to serious security incidents in Lamu, Taita Taveta, Garissa and Wajir where a police station was attacked by armed militia, thereby disturbing the peace.
Explaining that he was also responsible for border peace, Mr Masengeli said he was unable to comply with the court's directives due to the security breaches along the border.
While pardoning Mr Masengeli, Justice Mugambi warned other public officials against such behaviour.
“It is the Judiciary that guarantees adherence to the rule of law. Every Kenyan who means well for this country must fight for the independence of the Judiciary so that judges can be allowed to make decisions based purely on law and the facts without the fear of reprisals, interference, pressure or threats, whether direct or indirect. That is the cornerstone of democracy,” Justice Mugambi said.
He concluded: “It should be known to all that the independence of the Judiciary is not for the judges per se, but for the benefit of the public at large. It leaves judges with the discretion to make fair and even hard decisions meant to uphold the rule of law. Judges will always hold government organs to account for adherence to the Constitution and the law, and it is the primary duty of the state to ensure judicial independence is protected.”
