The High Court in Naivasha has found Deputy County Commissioner (DCC) Josiah Odongo guilty of contempt of court for allegedly defying two orders barring the demolition and fencing of a prime parcel of land near the Naivasha Law Courts.
Justice Mary Oundo ruled that Odongo disregarded court directives issued to stop the destruction of structures and the erection of a fence around the disputed property, describing his conduct as a serious affront to the rule of law.
However, Naivasha Officer Commanding Police Division (OCPD) Wilson Sigei escaped contempt proceedings after the court accepted his explanation for failing to enforce the orders, finding insufficient grounds to hold him personally liable for deliberate disobedience.
Court ruling on contempt of court
The ruling followed summons issued to the two senior government officials last week, requiring them to explain why they should not face action for failing to comply with the court's directives.
Odongo did not attend the latest court session, with the court being informed that he was unwell. A State Counsel from the Office of the Attorney General appeared on his behalf, but Justice Oundo rejected the attempt to have the government lawyer represent him in the contempt proceedings.
The judge maintained that contempt was a personal matter and that the Attorney General's office could not use state resources to shield an individual from accountability for alleged personal defiance of court orders.
“The Attorney General has no constitutional mandate to use State machinery to defend an individual against a penal charge of personal defiance for failing to show cause,” Oundo said.
In her assessment of the DCC's conduct, the judge faulted his response to the service of the court orders and the subsequent notice to show cause, describing it as marked by hostility, arrogance and blatant disrespect for the administration of justice.
Judge's assessment of DCC's conduct
Oundo said the alleged defiance went beyond failure to comply with court directives, pointing to actions that included overseeing the destruction of citizens' businesses and the erection of what she described as an intimidating barrier around the court premises.
The judge further observed that Odongo's response during his previous court appearance amounted to an admission of deliberate disobedience and demonstrated a lack of remorse over his conduct.
She warned that allowing public officers to disregard judicial orders while continuing activities expressly prohibited by the court would undermine the foundations of the rule of law and weaken public confidence in the justice system.
Implications for rule of law
“A public officer who treats such a process with casual indifference, continuing the very illegal act forbidden by the court, strikes at the foundation pillar of the rule of law,” the judge stated.
On Sigei, the court found that his explanation for the initial failure to enforce the orders was satisfactory and did not demonstrate wilful disobedience. Justice Oundo consequently discharged the notice to show cause against the OCPD, absolving him of penal liability in the specific proceedings.
Meanwhile, the court extended the orders prohibiting further fencing and demolition of structures on the disputed parcel until October 22, when the court is expected to make a further determination in the contempt case against Odongo.
