The Lower Eastern Times Opening The Third Eye
Related Articles
The High Court has issued anticipatory bail to Cleophas Malala, Deputy Party Leader of the Democratic Citizens Party (DCP), temporarily halting any arrest attempts by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) over unrest during his recent homecoming event in Kakamega.
Click here to join our WhatsApp Channel
Justice Diana Kavedza, sitting at the Kibera High Court, issued the ruling on Wednesday after Malala filed an application expressing fears that his arrest would violate his constitutional rights.
The court instructed Malala’s legal counsel to ensure he presents himself at DCI offices for questioning within five days, and no later than June 3. The former Kakamega senator is required to cooperate with authorities during any ongoing investigations.
If charges are eventually brought against Malala and approved by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), the court directed that he should not be arrested but instead be informed of the court where he will take a plea.
“The applicant is granted anticipatory bail set at Sh100,000, to be deposited with the court,” ruled Justice Kavedza.
She further clarified that while the DCI and DPP are free to continue investigating or prosecuting Malala, they must not detain or arrest him unless the court issues new orders.
The judge noted that if Malala is formally charged, the anticipatory bail will cease to apply, and the trial court will determine whether to release him on bail.
Malala alleged that police planned to detain him on Friday, May 30, to keep him in custody through the Madaraka Day holiday weekend, which he argued would infringe on his rights.
He claimed the intended arrest was politically driven and aimed at humiliating and intimidating him for hosting a DCP delegation at his homecoming, which turned chaotic after police clashed with supporters.
Malala was joined at the event by several leaders, including Senators John Methu (Nyandarua) and Karungo Thang’wa (Kiambu), among other party officials.
In his application, Malala argued that the alleged arrest plans were motivated by malice and aimed at suppressing his political activities.
Justice Kavedza emphasized that the court’s role was not to determine the truth of Malala’s fears but to uphold and protect his fundamental rights and freedoms as provided by the Constitution.
