The Nairobi Regional Police Commander has defended the security operations mounted across the city during the June 25, 2026, protests, telling the High Court that police acted lawfully and did not breach existing court orders by setting up roadblocks and checkpoints.
In response to a contempt application filed by Katiba Institute, Nairobi Regional Police Commander Issa Mohamed Mohamud says the security measures were legitimate operational decisions taken by officers on the ground in response to emerging threats and were not part of any pre-planned operation designed to block demonstrations.
In an affidavit before the court, Issa, who also serves as an Assistant Inspector General of Police, argues that the conservatory orders issued by the High Court in July 2025 did not outlaw police roadblocks or traffic checkpoints.
Instead, he says, the orders required the police to notify the public in advance only where there were pre-arranged and structured road closures, particularly during planned demonstrations.
"The conservatory orders did not impose an absolute prohibition on roadblocks, checkpoints or traffic diversions. They only required prior public notice where there were pre-planned and structural road closures," Issa states in the affidavit.
The police maintain that the June 25 deployments were not directed by the Office of the Inspector General but were independently implemented by area commanders after assessing rapidly changing security conditions.
According to the affidavit, officers had to make real-time operational decisions because organisers of the demonstrations had not issued the mandatory three-day notice to police as required under Section 5 of the Public Order Act.
The commander argues that without prior notification, the police could not adequately prepare for the protests, forcing commanders to respond as events unfolded.
"The deployments were reactive measures informed by evolving security assessments and not a coordinated plan to restrict constitutional rights," the affidavit says.
Issa further dismisses claims that the checkpoints amounted to unlawful road closures, insisting members of the public and peaceful demonstrators were allowed to move freely.
He says the temporary checkpoints were intended to intercept individuals suspected of planning acts of violence, vandalism or other criminal activities during the protests.
The police also argue that the security measures were authorised under the National Police Service Act, the Public Order Act and the National Police Service Standing Orders, adding that such operational decisions fall within the mandate of commanders responsible for maintaining public safety.
The Inspector General has urged the High Court to dismiss the contempt proceedings, arguing that the application is speculative, legally untenable and improperly seeks to interfere with operational policing decisions made in response to dynamic security situations.
The police insist they acted within the Constitution and have not wilfully disobeyed any orders issued by the High Court.
Comments
Sign in with Google to comment, reply, and like comments.
Continue with Google