While the country thought DIG Lagat had stepped aside, he was on annual leave

Deputy Inspector General David Lagat was on annual leave and had not stepped aside.

On June 16, Lagat sent a statement indicating that he had stepped aside to pave the way for investigations into the death of teacher Albert Ojwang on June 7, who had been arrested following the DIG’s complaint.

“In the good and conscious thought of my role and responsibilities of the Deputy Inspector General of Police of Kenya Police Service, and view of the ongoing investigations on the unfortunate incident of the death of Mr Albert Ojwang, I have today opted to step aside from the office of the Deputy Inspector General – Kenya Police Service pending completion of investigations,” Lagat’s statement sent on June 16, 2025 read in part.

Nevertheless, in court, documents he has filed in opposition to a case filed by a United Kingdom-based human rights defender, Eliud Matindi, indicate that he applied for an 18-day leave.

In the first document, titled ‘application for annual leave’ Lagat did not indicate that whether he wished or did not wish to receive his salary for the time he would be out of office.

His boss, Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja, approved the leave the same day.

Kanja directed that the DIG’s principal deputy, Patrick Kyalo Ti, would step in to carry out his duties during the leave.

Kanja wished Lagat a relaxing leave.

“ Following your application for annual leave, I am writing to confirm the approval and grant 18 days leave for the financial year 2024-2025, effective from June 17, 2025. During your absence, your duties will be performed by your principal assistant. We wish you a restful leave,” Kanja’s letter reads in part.

In his reply filed by lawyer Cecil Miller before Justice Chacha Mwita, Lagat argues he never left office. At the same time, he denies appointing Kyalo as his replacement.

“I categorically deny and rebut the allegations, insinuations and inferences drawn by the petitioner to the effect that I unlawfully relinquished or vacated my office as Deputy Inspector-General, or that I purported to appoint a successor, contrary to the Constitution or any written law,” his reply filed on Tuesday reads in part.

According to him, he decided to apply for a temporary administrative leave from office in light of the investigations surrounding Ojwang’s death.

However, in a public statement, Lagat announced he had stepped aside to allow investigations into the killing to continue without interference.

On June 16, Lagat wrote: “In the good and conscious thought of my role and responsibilities as the Deputy Inspector General of Kenya Police Service, and given the ongoing investigations on the unfortunate incident of the death of Mr. Albert Ojwang, I have today opted to step aside from the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Kenya Police Service pending completion of investigations. The functions of the office will henceforth be performed by my deputy until completion of the investigations,” stated Lagat in his statement.

In court yesterday, Lagat said the death, which happened at Central Police Station, where Ojwang had been detained, was unfortunate and had attracted significant public concern and speculation.

According to him, the application was made voluntarily and in good faith, in line with the principles of public accountability, institutional integrity and preservation of public confidence in the police service.

“ I reiterate that there was no misconduct on my part. No disciplinary process has been initiated against me by the National Police Service Commission (NSC) or any other competent body. The leave was not a resignation, nor did it constitute abandonment or cessation of office within the meaning of Articles 245 and 251 of the Constitution or Section 20 of the National Police Service Act. Therefore, the Petitioner's assertion that I resigned by implication has no basis in law,” continues Lagat.

He claims that his statement to the public on June 16 was a mere communication to the public of his temporary absence. “ Granting the orders prayed would unjustly impede my discharge of police duties, undermine operational continuity, and conflict with public interest in effective law enforcement,” Lagat argues, adding that if the orders sought by Matindi are granted, they would paralyse the effective functioning of Kenya Police.

The case stems from events leading to and after the death of teacher Ojwang on June 7 at the Central Police Station.

Matindi sued the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) and Attorney General. He also named Tito, Lagat, the Law Society of Kenya and Katiba Institute as interested parties.

In the case, Matindi accused NPSC of illegally allowing Lagat to step aside for completion of a probe into Ojwang’s killing.

According to him, there is no law allowing the DIG to make such a move.

“It was, instead, the first respondent’s constitutional duty to make that call, as demanded by Article 246(3)(b) of the Constitution,” said Matindi.

Matindi argued that the commission abdicated its constitutional function of appointing a person to act as DIG pending the appointment of a substantive officer holder.

“It is the Petitioner’s case that Eliud Kipkoech Lagat had no constitutional or statutory powers to appoint any person to act as DIG, Kenya Police Service during his claimed absence from that office,” he further said

In his arguments, Matindi said that both the Kenyan Constitution and the NPSC Act are silent on whether one can step aside, then resume duties. 

He said that it was the duty of NPSC to make the call for him to step aside, adding that the DIG had no powers to appoint Tito as his replacement in acting capacity.

“It is the Petitioner’s case that Eliud Kipkoech Lagat had no constitutional or statutory powers to appoint any person to act as DIG, Kenya Police Service during his claimed absence from that office,’ the human rights defender argued.

Matindi said that this was the role of NPSC, which should interview potential candidates for the DIG post and forward the name to President William Ruto for appointment.

In the case, Matindi argued that Lagat resigned from office and that President Ruto should appoint his successor after NPSC recommendations.

“Under Article 245(3) of the Constitution, there can only be one DIG, Kenya Police Service at any one time, whether appointed substantively under that provision or in an acting capacity under Article 246(3)(a) of the Constitution,” he said.

Lagat’s exit and return to office raised a storm following the Independent Police Oversight Authority (IPOA) decision not to press charges against him and a civilian, Erick Ndambuki.

IPOA recommended that Officer Commanding Station (OCS) of the Central Police Station, Samson Kiprotich Talaam, and police constables Mukhwana and Peter Kimani be charged with murder.

At the same time, there are three civilians- John Ngige Gita, who is also known as Kinara, Gin Ammitou Abwayo alias Gilbeys and Brian Mwaniki Njue, whom Mukhwana claimed were paid Sh2,000 to ‘punish’ the deceased.

The Isaac Hassan-led authority, on July 14, however, denied that it had cleared the DIG, adding that investigations remained active. This is despite Talam, Mukhwana, and  Kimani being charged with murder.

"IPOA’s investigation is still active and therefore the reports that the Authority has exonerated Mr Lagat are misleading," said Hassan.

In his second statement before IPOA, Mukhwana alleged the fatal assault on Ojwang’ sanctioned by his superiors, and allegedly carried out under the express orders of Lagat.

To facilitate the act, Mukhwana claimed he was given Sh2,000 to give remandees. The money was allegedly used to buy alcohol for the inmates who were assigned the task.

“Ni amri kutoka kwa mkubwa. Huwezi kataa amri ya mkubwa. Ukikataa kuna kitu inaweza kukufanyikia.” (It is an order from the boss. You cannot decline an order from your superior. If you refuse, something may happen to you, Mukhwana quoted his boss, Chief Inspector Samson Talaam, the Central Police Station OCS. 

In his detailed statement, Mukhwana further alleged that the plan to “discipline” Ojwang’ was hatched hours before he arrived at the station, during a closed-door meeting with the OCS and Deputy OCS.

The OCS allegedly instructed him to identify inmates willing to rough up a suspect who was to be brought in by officers from the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) later that evening.

“Nataka uende celi uangalie wale wamekaa rumande uwambie kuna kazi nataka wafanye kuna mahabusu analetwa wamushughilikie kidogo.” (I want you to go to the cell and look at those who have been in remand for long, tell them there is work I want them to do, a prisoner is being brought in, take care of him), Mukhwana claimed the OCS instructed him.

According to the officer, when the DCI officers arrived around 9:10 pm in a black Subaru with Ojwang in handcuffs, Mukhwana told the Ipoa investigators, he was called and handed over a phone. On the other end of the call was the OCS, who told Mukhwana that the suspect had arrived.

Shortly after Ojwang’ was booked into the cells, Mukhwana claimed that the OCS allegedly called him, instructing that the beating should be serious enough to cause visible injuries requiring hospitalisation.

“I called Talaam and asked him the extent of the beating that was needed. He told me apigwe apate majeraha apelekwe hospitali,” stated Mukhwana.

Moments later, Mukhwana recounted four inmates, including Colins Iter, Gil Ammiton, Brian Mwaniki, and Erick Ndambuki, dragged Ojwang’ into the last cell opposite the toilets.

“I could hear the screams from the cell.’’

In the statement, Mukhwana portrayed himself as a pawn in a system where refusal to obey unlawful orders could mean career sabotage or worse.

He said that the Damascus moment came after discovering that his colleagues had thrown him under the bus.

"I thought we were to cover each other, but later I discovered my colleagues had pinned ptheblame on me. That was June 11, 2025,” said Mukhwana, adding that the following day, his soul was ripped apart in a heap of fire for the truth that he decided to go back and write the second statement.

On the other hand, Miller said that DIG told IPOA that he had nothing to do with the murder. According to him, his client explained to the Isaac Hassan-led authority that he only complained about the teacher, just like any other Kenyan, but was not involved in anything else afterwards.

“The truth shall come out once those who were involved are charged. Lagat clearly stated that he only lodged a complaint against the deceased and only came to learn about his death the following morning after seeing the briefs. He also informed Ipoa that the death was unfortunate and he condoled with the family of Ojwang,” said Miller.