Interior CS Murkomen to challenge court ruling holding police IG liable for junior officers’ actions
The ruling centred around a decision made by former IG Koome to suspend the rights of KMPDU members to strike.
Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen has said his ministry will challenge a court verdict that holds the Inspector General of Police personally liable for the unlawful use of force by officers under his command, terming it a “misapplication of the law.”
Speaking at an interdenominational prayer service at the National Police College in Embakasi, Nairobi, Murkomen criticised the ruling, which he argued imposes laws designed for crimes such as genocide and crimes against humanity onto the day-to-day operations of the National Police Service.
More To Read
- Police service to receive 3,000 vehicles under Sh28 billion upgrade initiative
- Former IG Koome to pay for ordering police to beat up striking medics
- Murkomen warns against social media misuse, defends police over abduction claims
- NPS to unveil digital police stations to enable Kenyans file complaints online - IG Kanja
“I know there was a decision made the other day that the IG is responsible for every act of every police officer. I do not think that is good jurisprudence to superimpose a law that is dealing with genocide (and) crimes against humanity to the day-to-day operations of the National Police Service. It is a misapplication of the law,” he said.
He assured Police IG Douglas Kanja of his support, promising to use legal avenues to challenge the judgment.
Murkomen encouraged police officers to remain steadfast in executing their duties, adding that the government would stand by them as they worked to maintain national security.
Rogue officers warned
“Do the right thing. If a terrorist is facing you with a gun, deal with him with a gun,” he said while cautioning officers to act within the confines of the law.
He also warned that rogue officers would face consequences.
“Our support for you does not mean we support any acts of impropriety or digressing from your duty as a police officer. For those who are not following the law, we will also follow the law in guiding them to come back to the right path,” he said.
The ruling, delivered by High Court Judge Jairus Ngaah on December 31, 2024, declared that the IG would be held accountable for unconstitutional orders leading to the violation of individuals’ rights during peaceful protests, strikes, or assemblies.
“A declaration is hereby made that… the IG is accountable and personally liable for the acts or omissions of officers under his command infringing on the rights of the individual under Articles 36, 37 and 41 of the Constitution,” Justice Ngaah ruled.
The decision came after human rights groups filed a petition last year following incidents during a doctors’ strike. The court condemned former IG Japhet Koome, ordering him to personally pay the costs of the case.
The ruling centred around a decision made by Koome on April 14, 2024, where he attempted to suspend the rights of the Kenya Medical Practitioners, Pharmacists and Dentists Union (KMPDU) members to strike, effectively cancelling Articles 36, 37, and 41 of the Constitution.
The union had issued a strike notice earlier that year over issues including remuneration and contractual terms, as well as the promotion of consultants.
The court also criticised the violent attack on KMPDU Secretary-General Davji Atela during a peaceful demonstration at Afya House on February 29, 2024.
Constitutional rights
In his ruling, the judge stated that Koome’s directive to police commanders to “deal firmly and decisively” with the striking doctors was unjustifiable, particularly as it violated constitutional rights.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the decision is hereby quashed,” the judge ruled, highlighting that the police actions violated constitutional rights enshrined in Articles 36, 37, and 41.
Human rights organisations, including the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Katiba Institute, and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya), had filed the suit, arguing that Koome’s decision was disproportionate and unlawfully infringed upon the right to assemble, strike, and protest peacefully.
The judge reiterated that Article 36 guarantees the right to freedom of association, while Article 37 protects the right to peaceful demonstration.
He stated that the police’s unprovoked use of force against KMPDU members was not justified under any written law or constitutional limitation.