Court hearing on Ndiang’ui Kinyagia adjourned amid affidavit confusion
The court was unable to proceed after it emerged that there were major differences in legal instructions and statements given by lawyers and family members linked to the ICT expert’s case.
Confusion over who speaks for Ndiang’ui Kinyagia and contradictions in affidavits filed in court forced Justice Chacha Mwita to adjourn a highly anticipated hearing on Friday, postponing the matter to July 24.
The court was unable to proceed after it emerged that there were major differences in legal instructions and statements given by lawyers and family members linked to the ICT expert’s case.
More To Read
- Activist Boniface Mwangi arrest at home as police cite 'terrorism and arson' links to protests
- Speaker Moses Wetang’ula calls for urgent protest law reform to end chaos
- Naivasha MP Jayne Kihara released on Sh50,000 personal bond
- Rex Masai inquest reveals major gaps in police investigation
- Suspect behind patient's killing at Kenyatta National Hospital ward arrested- DCI
- Grief and anger as form three student killed during Saba Saba protests laid to rest
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK), represented by President Faith Odhiambo, asked the court to allow cross-examination of Ndiang’ui, his cousin Lilian Wanjiku Gitonga, and his mother Margaret Rukwaro.
Odhiambo said an affidavit filed by Gitonga on July 3 contradicted earlier information shared with the LSK, before and after Ndiang’ui resurfaced following his unexplained 13-day disappearance.
“We want to make an application before we start the hearing of this case, based on an affidavit sworn by Lilian Wanjiku Gitonga. My Lord, this affidavit is in stark contrast to the information we were earlier given,” Odhiambo told the court.
She said the inconsistencies raised serious concerns, calling for the questioning of all involved parties.
“We are seeking to cross-examine Mr Ndiang’ui, Ms Lilian Gitonga, and Ms Margaret Rukwaro since pertinent concerns have arisen from the contents of the affidavit,” she added.
The LSK president also said the society had not been informed about the affidavit beforehand, despite being one of the petitioners in the case.
The affidavit in question claims that during his absence, Ndiang’ui had contacted Gitonga and assured her he was safe and had not been abducted by any security agents, contrary to what was earlier presented in court.
This fresh version contradicts LSK’s earlier plea for a court order directing the police and DCI to either produce Ndiang’ui or account for his whereabouts, amid fears he had been abducted.
His disappearance in June caused a storm online, with many calling for his release.
The court further heard from lawyer Kibe Mungai, who had earlier worked with both the family and the Law Society, but later distanced himself from the second affidavit that was eventually filed.
Kibe explained that after a court session on July 3, he consulted Ndiang’ui and his relatives and prepared a draft affidavit based on their discussion.
However, after sharing the draft with the family, Kibe said they raised concerns about revealing certain details.
“The family said the affidavit made them uncomfortable, and I told them to amend it to a version they were comfortable with,” he explained.
Kibe said the revised affidavit he received differed greatly from the original instructions and, therefore, declined to file it through his law firm.
The court was informed that the final version was filed by another lawyer, Wahome Thuku, creating further confusion over the source and credibility of the statement.
Justice Mwita took note of Kibe’s visible unease while explaining his position and remarked on it during proceedings.
“You could tell his body language was discomforting,” Mwita said, pointing out the need to clarify who officially represents Ndiang’ui in the matter.
“The affidavit here is by someone else and not the second petitioner, Ndiang’ui. We need to make that distinction so that this person can cross-examine this person,” Mwita added.
Due to the conflicting versions and legal representation uncertainty, the judge said no progress could be made until the petitioners resolve their internal issues.
“This matter cannot proceed until the petitioners decide how to proceed with this case. Put your house in order,” he ruled.
Ndiang’ui appeared in court on July 3 with lawyers Kibe Mungai and Martha Karua, after he contacted his family saying he was safe. Despite that, the reasons for his disappearance and the details of where he was during that time remain unclear.
Top Stories Today
