‘Kamata kamata Fridays’ still on as court throws out LSK petition
The LSK wanted the police stopped from arbitrarily arresting suspects in instances where summons to appear would suffice.
The High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to block the police from arresting suspects on Fridays and keeping them in custody over the weekend, stating that such a blanket order cannot be granted as each case must be considered on its own merits.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi further ruled that the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), which filed the case, did not provide even a single affidavit by any of the persons on whose behalf the petition was brought before the court.
The LSK filed the case against the so-called ‘kamata kamata Fridays’ in 2019, seeking an injunction against the Directorate of Criminal Investigations and the Inspector-General of Police from arbitrarily arresting persons suspected of committing non-cognizable offences in instances where summons to appear suffice.
A non-cognizable offence is that for which a police officer may not arrest without a court-issued warrant.
The LSK had also pleaded with the court to direct Chief Justice Martha Koome to create and operationalise special plea courts to operate on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays for instances of arrests falling past official court working hours and days.
The LSK further wanted the court to direct the CJ to provide judges and magistrates on duty in every court station throughout the country on weekends, public holidays and after court working hours to deal with any urgent matter relating to the protection of human rights. According to the LSK, the police had made it a habit to whimsically and maliciously arrest and detain suspects on Friday afternoons and beyond court working hours in order to circumvent a constitutional dictum to produce suspects in court within 24 hours.
The LSK asserted that the conduct undermines the rule of law and constitutional values and principles.
In his ruling, however, the judge said it is now accepted judicial practice that any constitutional petition must state the rights alleged to have been infringed or threatened, the manner in which the violation was occasioned and the link with the person aggrieved must be demonstrated.
“It is not enough to merely cite constitutional provisions and fasten some facts onto them; the particulars of violation must set out the grievances with sufficient details to enable the respondent to answer,” the judge said.
