IG Kanja faces sentencing over Gen-Z protests defied court order

By  Joseph Wangui

Correspondent

Nation Media Group

What you need to know:

• Justice Patricia Nyaundi directed Mr Kanja to appear before the court next on September 28, 2026 for mitigation and sentencing.
• The court rejected the suggestion that internal police procedures could excuse non-compliance with a binding judicial order.

Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja has been found in contempt of court over police barricades that restricted access to Nairobi’s central business district during the second anniversary of the Gen-Z-led anti-Finance Bill protests.

Justice Patricia Nyaundi ruled that Mr Kanja failed to ensure officers under his command complied with orders requiring timely and prior public advisories before roads were blocked or checkpoints established.

She directed Mr Kanja to appear before the court next month, on September 28, 2026, for mitigation and sentencing following the contempt finding.

The court held the police chief responsible for roadblocks mounted on June 25, 2026, despite orders issued by Justice Lawrence Mugambi on July 9, 2025. The orders were later extended on October 2, 2025, pending determination of a constitutional petition filed by Katiba Institute.

During the second anniversary protests in June 2026 major highways leading into the capital city were sealed off from the early hours, with razor sharp barbed wire barriers and heavy police deployment reported along key entry points, including Mlolongo and Athi River. Roads around Parliament were also sealed off.

In the earlier orders Justice Mugambi had restrained the Inspector-General and officers subordinate to him from mounting barricades, police roadblocks or blocking access to Nairobi CBD and its streets “without issuing a timely prior advisory or notice on closure of roads to allow citizens plan their activities accordingly”.

The order followed complaints that police used razor-sharp barbed wire and roadblocks to prevent entry into the city centre. Katiba Institute argued that the restrictions interfered with freedom of movement and peaceful assembly.

In her ruling, Justice Nyaundi said the case was not limited to regulation of public demonstrations under Article 37 of the Constitution. It also concerned freedom of movement under Article 39 and the police service’s obligations under Articles 10 and 244.

The court said the order imposed a positive duty on the Inspector-General to ensure that the public was informed before road closures or checkpoints were introduced.

“Citizens cannot meaningfully exercise their movement when confronted with sudden unexplained barriers,” Justice Nyaundi observed.

The court rejected the suggestion that internal police procedures could excuse non-compliance with a binding judicial order. The Inspector-General, the court said, could not transfer responsibility to junior officers or rely on operational arrangements to avoid accountability.

Justice Nyaundi said the court expected Mr Kanja to explain what steps he had taken to ensure compliance. The court faulted him for failing to personally address the allegations or demonstrate measures taken to obey the order.

The judge said that omission went beyond an administrative lapse. It showed a failure to appreciate the constitutional responsibility attached to the office of Inspector-General.

The court also took note of assurances given before the June 25 operation. It said the Inspector-General had reportedly attended a press conference where the public was told the following day would be normal for schoolchildren, workers and business people. 

Despite those assurances, police mounted barriers around the CBD and major roads leading into Nairobi.

The closures disrupted transport and left commuters walking long distances after vehicles were turned back or diverted. Previous accounts cited patients travelling for dialysis and emergency treatment, workers, traders and people attending court proceedings among those affected.

The court linked the notice requirement to Article 24 of the Constitution, which provides that limitations on rights must be reasonable, justifiable and procedurally fair. 

Justice Nyaundi said restrictions imposed without the required notice could not meet those standards.

She stressed that contempt proceedings were not designed to protect a judge’s authority. Their purpose was to uphold the rule of law and ensure that court orders are obeyed.

Katiba Institute executive director Nora Mbagathi said the need to use contempt proceedings to secure compliance with court decisions raised a concern about respect for judicial authority.

“Although the ruling is welcome, the increasing need to engage the government through contempt applications to secure compliance with judicial decisions does not hold up in a country that should be governed by the rule of law and constitutionalism,” she said.

Vocal Africa Executive Director Hussein Khalid, who testified about difficulties moving through the city during the barricades, also welcomed the ruling.

“As Vocal Africa we are satisfied with the ruling and believe that it strengthens accountability and the fight against impunity in police and government,” he said.

Mr Kanja is required to appear before the High Court on September 28, 2026, for mitigation and sentencing.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.