In today’s court news,11 protestors who were illegally arrested during Gen Z protests last year awarded 2.2 M in damages even as the high court rules that the ban of the protests by the state was illegal.
Justice Bahati Mwamuye declared a protest ban issued by Nairobi Police Commander Adamson Bungei during the 2024 Finance Bill demonstrations illegal and unconstitutional and awarded the 11 damages.
He awarded them a total of Sh. 2.2 million in general and exemplary damages to the 11 petitioners granting each Sh. 100,000 as compensation for the violation of their constitutional rights.
A media alert had been issued by then police boss Bungei on June 18 2024, in which he purported to ban all protests and public assemblies within Nairobi’s Central Business District (CBD).
Justice Mwamuye held that the ban was a clear violation of the Constitution, specifically infringing on the rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of expression, human dignity, protection from arbitrary arrest, and due process, as enshrined under Articles 27, 28, 29, 33, 37, 49, and 244 of the Kenyan Constitution.
The court ruled that the police had acted ultra vires—beyond their legal powers—and emphasized that peaceful protest is a fundamental right in a democratic society.
In the case, 11 petitioners argued that during the protests the police used excessive force on persons participating in a peaceful protest, including by beating them with batons, lobbing teargas at them, and spraying them with water canons.
“The Respondents beat, clobbered, maimed and tortured persons participating in the peaceful march, and in the process also treated them in a cruel, inhuman or degrading manner.,” they argued
They further told the court that Respondents illegally used live bullets on unarmed and peaceful persons
participating in the peaceful demonstration.
They told court that they were illegally and indiscriminately arrested by the police under
the direct orders of the inspector general of police , Adamson Bungei while participating in the
peaceful march
They submitted that they were never informed of the reasons for the arrest and were also never granted the right to communicate with the advocate of their choice or any other person
