High Court quashes Natembeya charges, slams EACC for abuse of power
The High Court in Nairobi has quashed criminal charges against Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya, delivering a scathing indictment of investigative and prosecutorial conduct in a ruling that is likely to ignite fresh debate over the use of State agencies in political contests.
In a judgment delivered at the Milimani Law Courts, Justice Bahati Mwamuye found that the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) violated Natembeya’s constitutional rights during his arrest and investigations, rendering the entire prosecution fatally flawed.
The court held that the EACC acted unlawfully by denying the governor access to his lawyers at the time of his arrest on May 20, 2025.
Justice Mwamuye ruled that the move infringed on Natembeya’s right to legal representation and fair trial guarantees as enshrined in the Constitution.
“The denial of access to counsel at the earliest opportunity strikes at the heart of the right to a fair trial,” the judge observed, adding that constitutional safeguards are not ornamental but binding on investigative agencies.
The court also took issue with the manner in which investigators obtained the governor’s M-Pesa statements.
Justice Mwamuye found that the process used to access his financial records did not meet constitutional and statutory thresholds, terming it illegal and procedurally irregular.
According to the ruling, any evidence obtained in violation of constitutional protections cannot form the basis of a lawful prosecution. The judge further held that the institution of the anti-corruption case against Natembeya amounted to an abuse of the court process.
Consequently, the High Court barred both the EACC and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) from continuing with the prosecution based on the same set of facts. The charges were quashed in their entirety, effectively bringing the criminal proceedings against the governor to an end.
In addition, the court awarded Natembeya Sh2.5 million in general damages for infringement of his constitutional rights.
The ruling shifts the spotlight squarely onto the EACC and raises questions about the objectivity and independence of investigative bodies in high-stakes political cases.
It also places renewed scrutiny on the ODPP, headed by Director Renson Ingonga, which has in recent months faced criticism over its handling of several high-profile cases.
Critics have previously accused the ODPP of withdrawing or declining to pursue cases involving individuals perceived to be close to the Kenya Kwanza administration, while appearing more aggressive in cases involving figures seen as politically estranged from the ruling coalition.
Among the notable instances was the withdrawal of charges against former Sports Cabinet Secretary Ababu Namwamba in a procurement-related case, a move that drew mixed reactions from the public and legal analysts.
The ODPP also dropped charges against former Public Service Cabinet Secretary Moses Kuria, Aisha Jumwa, Mithika Linturi among others citing insufficient evidence.
By characterising the prosecution as an abuse of process, the High Court has set a high threshold for law enforcement agencies, particularly in cases involving elected leaders.
In another high-profile development, the ODPP terminated proceedings against several allies of President William Ruto, decisions that opposition leaders argued reflected selective application of justice.
The ODPP, however, has consistently maintained that all its decisions are guided strictly by evidence and the public interest, as required under Article 157 of the Constitution.
The National Police Service, including the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), and the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) have also previously faced accusations of being drawn into politically sensitive investigations.
