High Court orders immediate reinstatement of Trans Nzoia Governor Natembeya’s security detail
The court emphasised that the situation posed immediate risks, noting that senior public officials are entitled to security frameworks defined by established protocols.
The High Court has granted interim orders compelling the government to fully reinstate the security detail of Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya, terming the withdrawal of his protection a matter requiring urgent judicial intervention.
The directive also extends to Kakamega Senator Boni Khwalale, whose security was withdrawn under similar circumstances.
More To Read
- MPs direct EACC to probe suspected Sh22 million revenue leak in Trans Nzoia County
- High Court declines to stop EACC from arresting Bomet Governor Hillary Barchok
- DPP, EACC enter plea bargain with ex-Migori Governor Okoth Obado in Sh505 million graft case
- Senators expose Trans Nzoia officials for awarding themselves Sh30 million unsecured loans
- ‘I don’t want them’: George Natembeya vows to return state honours over political harassment
- Why we arrested Trans Nzoia County officials at Milimani Law Courts - EACC
In the ruling delivered on Tuesday, the judge issued conservatory orders restraining the respondents from taking any further steps that would reduce, alter, or interfere with the security arrangements of the two leaders until the petition before the court is heard and determined.
The court emphasised that the situation posed immediate risks, noting that senior public officials are entitled to security frameworks defined by established protocols.
The mandatory conservatory order requires the respondents—jointly and severally—to "forthwith reinstate and restore the security detail and arrangements of the 1st Interested Party and the 2nd Interested Party in the numbers, composition, and particulars as they existed immediately before the impugned actions."
The judge underscored that any deviation from the original security configuration would amount to defiance of the court's directive.
In the petition, the applicants argue that the sudden withdrawal of security was punitive and unlawful, lacking any justification grounded in statute or policy.
They maintain that the move contravened the constitutional and administrative procedures that guide the allocation of security to high-ranking state officers.
According to the petitioners, the withdrawal not only violated due process but also exposed the leaders to significant personal risk, given the nature of their public duties.
The judge agreed that the petition raised serious constitutional issues that warranted protection through interim measures.
The court observed that stripping a sitting governor of security without following due procedure could compromise their ability to discharge public functions effectively and safely.
The judge noted that the purpose of conservatory orders is to preserve the subject matter of litigation and prevent irreparable harm before the dispute is argued fully.
The reinstatement orders will remain in force until the court conducts an inter partes hearing on the Petitioner's Notice of Motion dated November 28, 2025.
The parties are expected to present their arguments during the hearing, after which the court will issue further directions on how the case will proceed.
Top Stories Today
