The High Court has declined to order the mass release of inmates charged or convicted of robbery with violence, warning that a blanket order would endanger public safety and disrupt the criminal justice system.

In a judgement delivered by justice Lawrence Mugambi ,the court acknowledged that the constitutional rights of accused persons had been violated through the continued use of robbery with violence provisions of the Penal Code, previously declared unconstitutional.

“The state is aware that the sections are unconstitutional, but they have continued to charge people using those sections,” Mugambi noted.

However, the judges emphasized that the court also has a duty to protect the wider public interest.

“It would be unfair or inappropriate to issue a blanket order prohibiting all trials, prosecutions, or releases of persons charged with robbery with violence,” the court ruled, noting that such a move would create confusion and undermine public safety.

The court rejected calls for the immediate release or acquittal of all suspects, stating that cases must be addressed individually.

The judge notes that sweeping remedy would ignore the unique facts of each case and could expose the public to harm.

The case arose from accused persons charged with robbery with violence using sections 295, 296 (1),(2) and 297 of the Penal Code, which define and prescribe penalties for robbery with violence.

Despite judicial pronouncements in March 2018 declaring aspects of the provisions unconstitutional, they argued that the State has continued to charge, prosecute, and convict suspects under the same sections.

The court found this conduct amounted to disobedience of prior rulings and a violation of the rights of accused persons, including the right to a fair trial and due process.

To balance accountability with public safety, the court invoked the doctrine of suspended invalidity. It ruled that although Sections 295 and 297 are unconstitutional, the declaration of invalidity would be suspended to allow the State time to correct the law.

The Judge noted that abrupt nullification would leave police, prosecutors, and courts without guidance on handling violent robbery cases.

“In the interest of justice and to safeguard against a legal vacuum, the court finds it necessary to suspend the operation and effect of the declaration,” the ruling states.

The court directed the Attorney General to file an affidavit every six months for 18 months, outlining steps taken to address constitutional defects and updating the court on progress in Parliament toward enacting compliant legislation.

The suspension will run until midnight on June 30, 2026.

The judges warned that after 18 months, the declaration of invalidity would take effect automatically. From midnight on June 30, 2027, any pending or fresh charges, prosecutions, or convictions founded solely on Sections 295 and 297 will stand quashed for unconstitutionality, and any person held exclusively under those provisions will be released.