10 years later; Why late MP George Muchai is not resting in peace

Nearly 10 years after his death, George Muchai is not resting in peace. And his family is still disturbed as the quest for justice remains elusive in the corridors of the country's legal system.

With five judgment cancellations and deepening uncertainty over the circumstances of the former legislator's death, the mystery over who pulled the trigger and who ordered it runs on. Who killed Muchai, or who wanted him dead, is a question many still wait to know.

On the cold morning of February 7, 2015, along Nairobi's Kenyatta Avenue at around 3 am, four lives were snuffed out in what appeared to be a professionally executed ambush.

The former Kabete Member of Parliament, his driver, Stephen Wambugu, and his two police bodyguards, Samuel Kailikia and Samuel Matanta, were shot dead in what prosecutors would later describe as a calculated assassination.

Seven suspects were arrested. Two separate cases, robbery with violence and murder, were opened at the Magistrate's Court and the High Court, respectively.

But eleven years on, justice has yet to be served in both matters, and on Wednesday, February 18, 2026, Milimani Chief Magistrate Lucas Onyina once again told a waiting court that his judgment was not ready.

To understand the weight of what has been delayed, one must return to that February night.

Muchai, a second-term MP known for his fiery political temperament, had been in the company of his aides when their silver Toyota Fortuner slowed at the junction of Uhuru Highway and Kenyatta Avenue roundabout at around 3 AM to buy the day's newspapers.

Without warning, a Mercedes-Benz station wagon rammed into the front fender of the legislator's vehicle.

What happened next was swift, clinical, and chilling. A tall,  dark passenger, later identified by prosecutors as prime suspect Eric Muyera Isabwa, alighted from the Mercedes-Benz.

He wore a balaclava mask, his gun concealed in his jacket. Like a professional marksman, he shot all four men using Muchai's driver’s lowered window.

He then shot each of them a second time. All bullets were on target. The entire shooting lasted approximately one minute. All four men died on the spot.

But that was not the beginning of the evening's terror. Five hours before the MP's murder, several victims were robbed, including two sisters, Gladys Waithera and Irene Muthoni, who had their vehicle violently carjacked at around 10 PM as they opened their house apartment gate.

Forced into the boot of their own car, the victims were allegedly driven across various estates in Nairobi as the suspected hitmen carried out other robberies before trailing the former MP from a family dinner at a restaurant along Waiyaki Way in Westlands at around 2 a.m.

Their vehicle was then used by the suspects to ferry themselves to the scene of Muchai's murder.

The two women, locked in the darkness of their car boot, eventually heard the vehicle stop, then the crack of gunfire which lasted a minute.

They had become unwitting witnesses to the very assassination that would become one of Kenya's most controversial political murder cases.

Seven individuals were charged in connection with the robbery and murder: Eric Muyera Isabwa (the alleged mastermind and gunman), Raphael Kimani (alias 'Butcher'), Mustapha Kimani Anyoni (alias 'Musto'), Stephen Astiva, Jane Wanjiru, Margaret Njeri, and Simon Wambugu.

They face ten counts of robbery with violence involving six victims, including the two sisters, as well as murder charges related to Muchai's killing, being handled separately at the High Court.

What was expected to be a straightforward criminal trial has instead become a labyrinthine legal saga.

Perhaps nothing has contributed more to the delay than the extraordinary number of magistrates who have sat on the case and subsequently departed.

The late Justice Daniel Ogembo, who once had carriage of the matter, was elevated to the High Court bench.

Mombasa High Court Judge Wendy Kagendo similarly heard aspects of the case before her own elevation. Justice Francis Andayi, too, was transferred before the matter could be concluded under his watch.

Most consequential of all was the role of City Hall-based Magistrate Roseline Oganyo.

She had been the trial magistrate who originally and diligently heard the matter after the three previous magistrates had abandoned the case.

In 2023, she made a crucial finding that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against all seven accused persons, placing them on their defence. It was a significant legal milestone.

Then, just as the case was entering its final phase, the suspects accused her of bias. Faced with those accusations, Magistrate Oganyo recused herself.

The matter was transferred back to Milimani Law Courts, where it had previously been handled by other magistrates.

A further magistrate was assigned to conclude it, but the suspects declined to appear before yet another judicial officer, and the case was sent back to Chief Magistrate Onyina, who ultimately took over the proceedings himself.

The revolving door had cost the case months, if not years, of progress.

The sheer scale of the prosecution's case also contributed to the delay.

Thirty-six witnesses were called to testify, each subject to lengthy examination-in-chief and cross-examination by defence counsels representing all seven accused.

Police officers, civilians, forensic experts, the six robbery victims, and a newspaper vendor who witnessed the shooting all took the stand across years of proceedings.

Mobile phone records emerged as a particularly critical element. Evidence from a Safaricom legal officer revealed that all accused persons had been in constant communication for over 72 hours before the fatal incidents, with call logs showing the prime suspect had made over 54 calls to the co-accused, whom he later denied knowing.

The court issued a summons to Safaricom officials to appear and produce the records.

The process of obtaining, presenting, and litigating the admissibility of this digital evidence added considerable time to an already protracted trial.

After Magistrate Oganyo's prima facie finding, the accused were ordered to tender their defences.
They refused, not once, but repeatedly. Their strategy was to collapse the case on constitutional grounds before entering any defence.

On September 16, 2024, with the matter coming for a defence hearing, the seven again declined. Magistrate Onyina responded decisively.

"The case was coming for a defence hearing, but the accused persons have declined to tender defences. I will deliver my judgment on October 22, 2024, at 2 pm," Magistrate Onyina, September 2024.

But before October 22 arrived, the accused moved to the High Court before Justice Alexander Muteti, seeking to stay the trial and block the judgment.

Justice Muteti declined, ordering the seven to appear before the trial court and tender their defences.

Three days later, the suspects appeared before Magistrate Onyina. They had changed their minds, claiming they had been misled by their lawyers and sought a chance to speak.

Onyina granted their plea. Each of the seven suspects duly entered the witness box and, one by one, denied any involvement in the robberies or the murder.

Running parallel to the trial has been a fierce legal argument about whether the suspects are even being charged with offences that exist in Kenyan law.

Defence lawyer Stephen Ongaro argued relentlessly that charges of robbery with violence under Sections 295 and 296 of the Penal Code were declared unconstitutional by a three-judge High Court bench in September 2016, in the case of Joseph Kaberia Kahinga and eleven others.

Justices Jessie Lessit, Stella Mutuku, and Luka Kimaru found the relevant sections void.

The Attorney General was given 18 months to have the law amended. That deadline passed in March 2018. No amendments were made.

"Since March 2018, Robbery with Violence and Attempted Robbery with Violence have ceased to be offences in Kenya. Sections 295, 296(1), 296(2), 297(1), and 297(2) of the Penal Code ceased validity on March 15, 2018." The accused persons' contention before the court.

State Prosecutor Willy Momanyi vehemently opposed, arguing the charges were legally sound, and the applications were dilatory tactics.

He contended the trial court lacked jurisdiction to determine constitutional questions. Magistrate Onyina agreed, declining to drop charges or stay proceedings.

"This court's attention has not been drawn to any authority to stay the criminal case pending before it. The application for a stay of proceedings lacks merit and has no legal basis," Magistrate Onyina, ruling on stay application.

Undeterred, the suspects filed a petition before the High Court seeking to have their charges quashed entirely.

On January 29, 2026, Justice Lawrence Mugambi delivered a ruling that was simultaneously a vindication and a disappointment for the defence.

He confirmed that the Director of Public Prosecutions had continued using unconstitutional Penal Code sections to charge suspects since 2016, and further faulted the Attorney General for failing to seek Parliament's amendment within the mandated period.

"The State is aware that the sections are unconstitutional, but they have continued to charge people using those sections," Justice Mugambi.

But Justice Mugambi declined to order a mass release of suspects, invoking the doctrine of suspended invalidity.

While acknowledging that the constitutional rights of the accused had been violated, the court held that a blanket release order would endanger public safety and disrupt the criminal justice system.

The High Court suspended the declaration of invalidity until midnight on June 30, 2027, giving the government 18 months to amend the law, a lifeline for ongoing prosecutions, including the Muchai case.

"A blanket order prohibiting all trials or releases of persons charged with robbery with violence would create confusion and undermine public safety," Justice Mugambi.

The sequence of postponements reads like a grim chronicle of a justice system straining under its own weight. October 22, 2024, the first scheduled judgment date, passed without a verdict.

Then it moved again. Then again. Then the High Court petition intervened. Then January 30, 2026. Then February 6. Then, on Wednesday, February 18, 2026, for the fifth time, Magistrate Onyina told a waiting public the judgment was not ready.

The court is now expected to render judgment on March 5, 2026, while the High Court murder matter is scheduled for defence hearings from March 18, 2026.

It is a case that has outlasted two Presidents, several Cabinet reshuffles, numerous political scandals, and nearly a decade of Kenyan social history.

Muchai's family, his constituents in Kabete, and Kenyans who believe in accountability for political violence, are still waiting.

The wheels of justice, as this case has shown, can be excruciatingly slow.

And for a family still searching for closure eleven years after a cold February morning on Kenyatta Avenue, every postponement is another wound.