The recent actions taken by the Kahawa Law Courts, under Trial Magistrate Hon Richard Koech, have brought serious questions about whether the judiciary is being used to punish young Kenyans for protesting.
Cases involving Wanjiku Thiga, Peter Kawanjiru, and the Mawego 8 have shown a troubling pattern individuals being freed by other courts only to be rearrested and charged with terrorism at Kahawa.
This move has not only raised eyebrows but also created fear among many youths who feel they are being unfairly targeted for speaking up.
Wanjiku Thiga and Peter Kawanjiru were arrested after the June 25 protest in Kikuyu, where several government offices were damaged. They were initially released by courts in Ruiru and Kiambu. But soon after, they were rearrested, taken into custody by the Anti-Terrorism Police Unit, and charged with terrorism under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
These charges were then brought before the Kahawa Law Courts. What bothers many people is that the same actions were earlier treated as protest-related destruction, but suddenly turned into terrorism after their release.
Many believe this is a clear sign of political interference in the judiciary.The Mawego 8’s story follows a similar path. They were part of a protest on July 3 during the funeral of blogger Albert Ojwang, who died in police custody. That protest ended in the burning of Mawego Police Station.
After their arrest, they were freed by the Oyugis Law Court. But instead of going home, they were rearrested and taken to Nairobi, where they were again charged with terrorism.
Their cases are now being handled at Kahawa Law Courts, with all eight remanded at Kamiti Maximum Prison. The big concern is not whether these young people committed crimes, but whether the charges and processes used against them are fair.
Charging protesters with terrorism, especially after they are freed by other courts, makes it seem like the system is being misused to silence dissent. Bail is also set so high that most of these young people can’t afford it, keeping them locked up as they await trials.
Hon Richard Koech, who oversees many of these cases at Kahawa Law Courts, has become a central figure in this growing concern. His courtroom is now seen by many as a place where protestors end up facing harsh charges and impossible bail terms.
Critics are not just questioning the charges, but how one court seems to undo the rulings of others with no new evidence except reclassified charges. These actions are damaging trust in the courts, especially among youth who feel they are being punished for their political views.
The judiciary is supposed to act independently and protect the rights of all citizens. But when people are arrested, released, and then suddenly rearrested under heavier charges by the same government they were protesting against, it raises fair questions.
Are the courts being used to serve justice or to serve the interests of those in power? Hon Richard Koech must answer to this concern, not by ignoring it, but by ensuring his courtroom does not become a tool of fear for young Kenyans.
The law should protect, not intimidate. And it should never be used to silence those who are simply demanding a better country.
