BY SAM ALFAN.
A police officer from Mutuini police station has been ordered to pay a family Sh700,000 for unlawfully removing them in their house.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi ordered Evans Gitau, a police officer at Mutuini police station to pay the money to the family as compensation for locking them out of their house unlawfully.
The judge declared that Gitau infringed the couple’s rights as guaranteed by Article 28, 29 (d) and 31(a) of the constitution.
“An order for compensation to the tune of Sh700,000 to be borne individually by police officer Evans Gitau,” Judge Mugambi ordered.
The judge further noted that the petition proved beyond reasonable doubts.
Justice Mugambi said it was clear that the liability for the violation squarely lies on Gitau and there is absolutely no evidence that at the time Gitau was acting on his superiors’ instructions.
The judge added that as a matter of fact, the couple own account as captured in his affidavit is that when they went Mutuini Police Station and reported the Gitau to his superior, Gitau was reprimanded in their presence and ordered to return the keys he had impounded.
“This demonstrates that the police officer Evans Gitau was on a frolic of his own and his superiors or employers had nothing to do with his actions. It is manifest that those actions did not occur as part of execution of the Gitau’s duties,” said the judge.
Justice Mugambi further said that Gitau’s action was completely unjustified and had nothing to do with performance of police duties.
“The quick intervention by the Gitau’s superior (OCS) absolves the employer from the Gitau’s unconstitutional and unlawful conduct against the Petitioners. I find no wrongdoing on the part of the Inspector General and Attorney General in regard to the unlawful and unconstitutional conduct of the police officer in the circumstances,” ruled judge Mugambi.
Judge Mugambi said after he examined the petition closely and it was clear to him that the petition as pleaded meets the threshold and it set out the specific constitutional provisions that the police officer by his conduct violated and has also detailed the facts that give a description of how those violations were carried out.
“There was no rebuttal or any form of justification given by any of the Respondents against the brutal and reprehensible conduct that the officer Gitau did of deposing the family (Lucas Mutua and his wife Monica Katilo) from their house and having them spend the night with their child out in the streets for a week. This arbitrary action violated the petitioner’s inherent dignity as human beings and was a direct violation of Article 28 of the Constitution,” said the judge.
He added that it was also an affront to their right of privacy under Article 31 to invade their home without notice and unjustifiably eject them.
Additionally, the treatment that the Petitioners were subjected to of being thrown out into the streets for a week was a violation of the right to freedom and security of the person under Article 29 of the Constitution considering the risk of physical harm that the officer Gitau action exposed them to and also the psychological and mental torture that they endured for the duration in question.
The couple filed a constitutional petition for violation of their constitution rights by the police officer after removing them from their house and locked it.
Mutua told the court that on 23rd May 2021, his wife Monica called him and informed that a police officer had invaded their house.
He said his wife was forced to leave the house with their 4-year-old child.
The officer went ahead and locked the house with a new padlock and seized the house keys rendering them homeless. The family was homeless for a week.
Afterwards Mutua called him and directed him to go to Mutuini Police Station with a ‘mbuzi in order to get their house keys.
He made known that Mutua did not inform him whether he had committed any crime neither did he state the reason for displacing them by taking hold of their house keys.
He alleges that his pleas to the officer to return the keys fell on deaf ears. Furthermore, that the officer blocked his phone number due to his persistent phone calls.
Aggrieved, Mutua reported the matter at Mutuini Police Station. Gitau was then summoned by their Commanding Officer at the Station, to explain why he had displaced the couple.
Mutua told the court that the officer did not give any explanation and was ordered to return the Petitioners’ house keys.
The couple took issue with the Gitau’s actions as were done in bad faith since no justification was given for the conduct.
The couple contended that the Gitau violated their rights under Articles 28, 29(f), 31, 39(3), 40, 43(1)(b) and 53 of the Constitution.
