Maraga Demands Probe Into Hooded Officers, Warns Against Normalising Police Brutality

Former Chief Justice David Maraga has vehemently condemned the escalating police brutality and impunity in Kenya, specifically calling for an investigation into the deployment of hooded officers during demonstrations in Nanyuki and armed plain-clothes officers in a university hostel. His remarks highlight a disturbing pattern of human rights violations by law enforcement, urging adherence to constitutional principles of policing, accountability, and the protection of fundamental freedoms. The article examines the legal framework governing police conduct in Kenya, including constitutional safeguards and statutory provisions, alongside recent judicial pronouncements that underscore the illegality of concealed police identities and excessive force.

Former Chief Justice David Maraga has issued a stark warning against the normalisation of police brutality and impunity in Kenya, following recent incidents that have drawn widespread condemnation. Maraga, a prominent voice on judicial integrity and human rights, sharply criticised the deployment of hooded officers during demonstrations in Nanyuki, where three people were reportedly killed, and the presence of armed plain-clothes officers inside a university hostel. These events, he argued, represent serious violations of constitutional rights and demand immediate public explanation and accountability from security agencies.

Maraga's intervention underscores a critical juncture in Kenya's commitment to the rule of law and human rights, particularly concerning the conduct of its National Police Service. His call for a probe into these actions, and his assertion that a government unable to protect its citizens from its own security forces faces a legitimacy crisis, resonate deeply within a society grappling with a history of police excesses. This article delves into the legal framework governing police conduct in Kenya, analysing the implications of these alleged violations against constitutional and statutory provisions, and considering the mechanisms for accountability.

The legal framework governing policing in Kenya is primarily anchored in the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, and the National Police Service Act, 2011 (NPSA). The Constitution enshrines fundamental human rights and freedoms, including the right to life (Article 26), human dignity (Article 28), freedom and security of the person (Article 29), and the freedom of assembly, demonstration, picketing, and petition (Article 37). These rights place a high obligation on state organs, including the National Police Service, to respect, protect, promote, and fulfil them.

Article 244 of the Constitution outlines the objects and functions of the National Police Service, mandating it to strive for the highest standards of professionalism and discipline, prevent corruption, promote transparency and accountability, and comply with constitutional standards of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The NPSA further elaborates on these principles, providing guidelines on the use of force, which must be necessary and proportionate, and emphasising the importance of identifiable officers. To ensure civilian oversight and accountability, the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) was established under the Independent Policing Oversight Authority Act, 2011. IPOA's mandate includes investigating deaths or serious injuries resulting from police action and recommending prosecutions, thereby playing a crucial role in addressing police misconduct.

The deployment of hooded officers during public demonstrations, as witnessed in Nanyuki, directly contravenes established legal principles and recent judicial pronouncements in Kenya. The High Court has explicitly barred the Inspector General of Police from deploying officers in civilian clothes or with concealed identities to manage public protests, ruling that all officers must be in official uniform and remain identifiable at all times. This ruling, stemming from a petition by the Law Society of Kenya, underscores the constitutional imperative for transparency and accountability in policing, which is undermined when officers operate without clear identification. The use of live ammunition and the reported killings in Nanyuki further raise grave concerns regarding the police's adherence to the principles of necessity and proportionality in the use of force, as stipulated in the NPSA and international human rights standards.

The presence of armed plain-clothes officers inside a university hostel also presents significant legal challenges. While criminal law generally permits police entry into premises for arrests without a warrant under reasonable cause, the manner of entry and the lack of clear identification by armed plain-clothes officers in a private space like a university hostel raise questions about due process, privacy, and the potential for arbitrary action. The NPSA requires officers to identify themselves and state their purpose before using force to gain entry, even when a warrant is not required. Such actions, particularly in an academic setting, can be perceived as intimidation and a violation of the security of the person, eroding public trust in law enforcement.

Recent judicial decisions have reinforced the need for police accountability. In March 2026, the Kisumu High Court awarded KES 38.6 million in compensation to victims of police brutality during the 2023 Okoa Uchumi protests, invoking the principle of command responsibility and ordering the National Police Service to develop regulations governing the use of firearms in public order management. This judgment, alongside the conviction of former police officer Fredrick Leliman for the murder of human rights lawyer Willie Kimani, signals a growing judicial intolerance for police impunity. Despite these legal advancements and the existence of IPOA, challenges persist in ensuring timely investigations and prosecutions, leading to continued calls for strengthening oversight mechanisms and fostering a culture of human rights within the police service.

Former Chief Justice David Maraga's forceful condemnation of police brutality serves as a critical reminder of the ongoing struggle to uphold constitutionalism and human rights in Kenya. The incidents in Nanyuki and at Multimedia University highlight a troubling pattern of police conduct that disregards legal mandates for transparency, accountability, and the proportionate use of force. The judiciary has consistently affirmed the illegality of concealed police identities during protests and has held the National Police Service liable for excessive force, yet implementation and adherence remain significant hurdles.

For legal practitioners, these developments underscore the imperative to vigorously defend clients' constitutional rights, particularly in cases involving freedom of assembly and allegations of police misconduct. It is crucial to leverage existing legal frameworks, including the Constitution, the NPSA, and the IPOA Act, to pursue remedies for victims and advocate for greater police accountability. Practitioners should closely monitor the responses of security agencies to Maraga's demands and the outcomes of ongoing investigations, as these will be indicative of Kenya's commitment to reforming its policing practices and preventing the normalisation of brutality. Continued vigilance and legal action are essential to ensure that the principles of justice and human dignity prevail.