CourtsCrime WatchHomeMain StoryNational NewsNewsPolitics

High Court marks Ndiangui disappearance case as withdrawn

Justice Chacha Mwita has closed the case seeking the production of activist Ndiangui Kinyagia who had been reported missing after he allegedly went into hiding.

In his ruling today, the High Court Judge marked the matter as withdrawn after Ndiangui, through his advocate Martha Karua, requested that the case be closed, citing fear for his life as the reason he went underground.

“I order this matter marked as withdrawn as to no orders to costs,” Mwita ruled.

During today’s hearing, Ndiangui told the court that he fled in hiding without contact after the police raided and ransacked his home, later finding the locks changed.

According to Ndiagui, it is the experience that forced him into hiding without his phone or any contact with family, insisting he acted as any normal person would do to preserve life.

In his affidavit filed in court, he claimed he feared possible abduction, torture, or even death, pointing to previous cases of enforced disappearances.

Karua asked the court to close the matter, noting that LSK has since been discharged from the proceedings and that orders previously issued to stop Ndiangui’s arrest had served their purpose.

She stressed that the activist is not a fugitive and has a fixed residence.

During today’s session, the court also heard that Ndiangui’s electronic devices, allegedly seized during the police raid, remain in the custody of authorities.

Karua urged the court to order their return, arguing that the police never sought judicial authority to access them.

“If police require the gadgets, then they should make an application to have them,” Karua told the court.

See also  Al Qaeda rebrands to Hayat Tahrir al Sham

The State did not oppose the withdrawal but objected to the removal of LSK from the case, saying a separate petition would be necessary.

It argued that since LSK were the original applicants, their withdrawal rendered the petition collapsed and left the court without jurisdiction to make further orders.

“There is no case upon which the court can be moved to make orders,” the State submitted.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button