The inquest into the death of Rex Masai has been extended after the Milimani Principal Magistrate’s Court allowed eight additional witnesses to testify, despite the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) having already closed its case.
Milimani Principal Magistrate Geoffrey Onsaringo granted an application by the National Police Service (NPS) to call six additional witnesses and also allowed IPOA to present two more witnesses before the inquest is concluded.
However, the court declined an application seeking to recall witness Doris Mukiri Mugambi for a third time, ruling that such a request would amount to an abuse of the court process.
In his ruling, Magistrate Onsaringo said the court was satisfied that the testimony of the additional witnesses was necessary for the just determination of the inquest.
The six witnesses approved following the NPS application are:
- A representative from the Integrated Command, Control and Communication Centre (IC3);
- A representative from Absa Bank;
- A representative from Makau Casino;
- A representative from Bliss Hospital;
- A representative from International Life House; and
- Representatives from Kamukunji, Kilimani, Pangani and KICC police stations to produce the Arms Movement Registers.
The court also allowed IPOA to call two additional witnesses.
“The court hereby directs that summons do issue to the above-named officers to attend court and testify on a date to be fixed by this court,” the magistrate ordered.
He further directed that no further applications to recall witnesses would be entertained. Similarly, no additional witnesses will be allowed unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated and the court is satisfied that such evidence is necessary for the just determination of the inquest.
The application by the NPS was made after IPOA investigator Justin Nyatete concluded his testimony, which had prompted calls for the inquest proceedings to be marked as closed.
Counsel for the National Police Service argued that the inquest had exposed significant evidentiary gaps since it began, describing the proceedings as having been treated “like a circus” by IPOA. The NPS maintained that the court has powers under Section 387 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call additional witnesses to ensure that no relevant evidence remains unexplored.
The NPS argued that all material evidence should be placed before the court and insisted that no stone should be left unturned before the inquest is concluded. Among the witnesses sought were officers to produce Arms Movement Registers from Kamukunji, Kilimani, Pangani and KICC police stations.
The application was opposed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), which argued that it was a second attempt by the NPS to delay the proceedings by introducing fresh evidence at the tail end of the inquest.
Counsel for the DPP, Jalson Makori, told the court that witness number 13 had already testified that information from IC3 indicated the CCTV cameras were not functioning on the material dates. He argued that the application had not been made in good faith.
The DPP further submitted that Doris Mukiri Mugambi had already testified twice and that the remaining witnesses sought by the NPS were not relevant to the issues before the court. The prosecution maintained that all available evidence relating to the inquest had already been presented and urged the court to declare the proceedings closed.
IPOA also opposed the application, describing it as a delaying tactic. Its counsel argued that the proceedings had reached an advanced stage after substantial evidence had already been received.
The authority further submitted that the National Police Service was alleging gaps in evidence despite bearing responsibility for preserving and producing some of the material in question. IPOA argued that the alleged gaps resulted from the NPS’s own lack of cooperation and that the application was intended to unnecessarily prolong the proceedings.
IPOA also told the court that CCTV footage from Absa Bank had already been produced and that the Arms Movement Register had already been tendered in evidence. Counsel argued that the request for additional documents from other police stations was unnecessary.
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) also opposed the application, noting that the National Police Service had made a similar request in October last year.
“An introduction of new witnesses undermines the principle of expeditious conclusion of matters,” counsel for the LSK submitted.
In response, counsel for the National Police Service maintained that the application was well-founded in both fact and law. The NPS argued that there is no substitute for the truth and that IPOA had a duty to obtain all relevant material from the police.
The NPS denied that the application was intended to delay the proceedings, insisting that its sole objective was to ensure that all relevant evidence is placed before the court before the inquest is concluded.
