Naivasha Member of Parliament Jayne Kihara has been released on a Ksh50,000 personal bond pending a court ruling on whether she will formally take plea on July 29, 2025. This follows a contested attempt by the State to charge her with offensive conduct, a move fiercely opposed by her legal team.
Kihara, who was arraigned before Magistrate Benmark Ekhubi, was represented by a high-profile legal team led by Senior Counsel Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka and Ndegwa Njiru. The prosecution was led by Victor Owiti.
The MP had been arrested Thursday evening at her home in Maraigucu, Naivasha, after reportedly failing to honour summons from the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI). She was later booked at Naivasha Police Station, according to Nyandarua County Assembly Speaker Wachira Waiganjo, who spoke to Capital News Beat.
The charges stem from allegations that Kihara made remarks undermining the authority of a public officer, a criminal offence under Section 132 of the Penal Code. However, her defence has challenged the constitutionality of that statute.
In a letter addressed to the DCI and signed by Ndegwa & Ndegwa Advocates, Kihara referenced a 2016 High Court ruling that declared Section 132 unconstitutional. The legal precedent cited is the case of Robert Alai v Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 174 of 2016, in which Justice Chacha Mwita ruled that the section violated the right to freedom of expression and was thus invalid.
“Our client… finds herself unable to participate in a process founded upon a law that has been declared invalid,” the letter stated.
The DCI alleges that Kihara disseminated inciteful or disruptive content during recent public rallies, remarks that authorities say warranted investigation. Central to the controversy are her criticisms of President William Ruto’s directive to security forces to shoot violent protesters in the leg, a statement that has sparked widespread debate and condemnation from human rights activists.
Kihara’s lawyers argue that the invocation of a law already nullified by the courts is not only legally untenable but a violation of her constitutional rights. They have called on the judiciary to quash the proposed charges altogether.
The magistrate is expected to issue a ruling on whether the charges will proceed on July 29, a decision that could have far-reaching implications on free speech, political dissent, and law enforcement conduct in Kenya.
