Court rejects NPSC bid to block ex-police officer's case in Huruma gun incident

Justice Anna Ngibuini Mwaure ruled that the objection did not raise a pure point of law capable of disposing of the case at a preliminary stage. She directed that the matter proceed to a full hearing.

The petitioner, Andrew Kyalo Mwanzia, joined the Kenya Police Service in April 2015 under the terms outlined in his appointment letter. He served for about six years until July 19, 2021, when he was dismissed from duty. 

Through lawyer Sophie Nekesa, the petitioner told the court that he was a hardworking and law-abiding officer who had worked without blemish until his dismissal, which he claims was unconstitutional and in violation of his rights.

The case stems from an incident on January 4, 2021, when Kyalo’s G3 rifle allegedly discharged several rounds at Huruma Shopping Centre while he was reportedly under the influence.

He was disarmed upon returning to camp, and the incident was recorded in the official occurrence book. He later claimed that he was coerced into signing documents that turned out to contain false information.

On January 25, 2021, he was suspended from duty without pay, without being given an opportunity to face or cross-examine his accusers.

On July 19, 2021, he was dismissed from the service. He appealed against the decision in February 2023 but says the appeal was never considered.

In his petition, Kyalo is seeking reinstatement to the police service or, alternatively, payment of all dues from the date of dismissal.

He argues that the disciplinary process was rushed, biased, and conducted in total disregard of constitutional safeguards, including the right to a fair trial and hearing.

The NPSC, however, maintained that the case was an abuse of the court process and should have been filed as a normal labour dispute rather than as a constitutional petition.

Justice Mwaure disagreed, finding that the issues raised required full litigation and could not be determined through a preliminary objection.

She dismissed the objection and directed each party to bear their own costs.