Rose Owira & 23 others v Attorney-General & another; Kenya National Commission on Human Rights & 4 others (Intersted Parties) [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Justice W. Korir
Judgment Date
October 07, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Rose Owira & 23 others v Attorney-General & another, highlighting key legal findings and implications involving the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights.

Case Brief: Rose Owira & 23 others v Attorney-General & another; Kenya National Commission on Human Rights & 4 others (Intersted Parties) [2020] Eklr

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Rose Owira & Others v. Attorney-General & Others
- Case Number: Constitutional Petition Number 410 of 2018
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: October 7, 2020
- Category of Law: Constitutional Law
- Judge(s): Justice W. Korir
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve several legal issues, including:
a) Whether the Court can order the Attorney General to advise the President to establish a judicial commission of inquiry.
b) Whether the Inspector-General of Police has failed to initiate and conduct investigations into the alleged killings of the petitioners’ kin by the police.
c) Whether the Inspector-General violated the rights of some petitioners to access information and justice by failing to inform them about inquest proceedings regarding their deceased kin.
d) Whether the Court can direct the Inspector-General to initiate prompt investigations into the deaths of the petitioners’ kin.
e) Whether the petitioners can raise new issues against the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA).

3. Facts of the Case:
The petitioners, consisting of individuals related to deceased persons allegedly killed by police, filed a petition against the Attorney-General, the Inspector-General of Police, and various human rights organizations. The petitioners claimed that the Inspector-General failed to investigate the deaths of their kin, violating their constitutional rights to equal protection and access to justice. They sought declarations and orders for investigations into the police's use of lethal force and the establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry.

4. Procedural History:
The petition was filed on November 16, 2018, and included several affidavits from the petitioners detailing their claims of extrajudicial killings and the lack of investigations. The respondents, including the Attorney-General and the Inspector-General, denied the allegations, asserting that investigations were ongoing or that inquests were being conducted. The interested parties, including human rights organizations, supported the petitioners' claims.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered various constitutional provisions, including Article 244(c) of the Constitution, which mandates police accountability, and the National Police Service Act, which outlines the responsibilities of the Inspector-General.
- Case Law: The court referenced previous cases, including *In the Matter of Interim Independent Electoral Commission* [2011] eKLR, to discuss the separation of powers and the Attorney General's advisory role. It also cited international human rights principles regarding the right to prompt investigations into extrajudicial killings.
- Application: The court found that while the Inspector-General had not entirely failed in his duties, there were significant delays in concluding investigations. The court determined that the petitioners had a right to timely investigations and that the Inspector-General must act promptly to conclude the ongoing investigations.

6. Conclusion:
The court issued a declaratory order directing the Inspector-General to promptly and impartially conclude investigations into the deaths of the petitioners’ kin. However, the court denied other reliefs sought by the petitioners, emphasizing the need for ongoing investigations and the importance of the judicial process.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the judgment.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled in favor of the petitioners to some extent, recognizing the delays in police investigations into extrajudicial killings as a violation of their constitutional rights. The court emphasized the need for timely justice and accountability, while also acknowledging the complexities involved in police investigations. The case highlights the ongoing challenges related to police accountability and human rights in Kenya.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Rose-Owira--23-others-v-Attorney-General--another-Kenya-National-Commission-on-Human-Rights--4-others-Intersted-Parties-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1958_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries