Police Inspector Wins Case Against IG Douglas Kanja

As pressure continues to mount against the Office of the Inspector General of Police, held by Douglas Kanja, another police officer has worn a landmark ruling against the Attorney General and the IG.

The police officer Isaac Kirimi Kariuki, moved to court to challenge a decision by the Inspector General of Police to transfer him to the far-flung Turkana County despite caring for a child living with a disability.

Appearing before the Employment and Labour Relations Court(ELRC), the officer argued that the government represented by the Office of the Attorney General, National Police Service Commission, and the Directorate of Criminal Investigations(DCI), had errored in ordering his transfer from Nairobi to Turkana.

The officer further argued in the court documents that his seven-year-old son would suffer due to the transfer to the far-flung region.

Justice Byram Ongaya of the ELRC ordered the AG, NPSC, and DCI to develop a policy that regulates the transfer and other rights of police officers whose dependents are suffering from other forms of physical and other forms of cognitive disability.

Kirimi, in his supporting affidavit filed on October 15, 2024, argued that his son regularly attends a child’s clinic at one of the premier hospitals in Nairobi, and therefore, his transfer would impact that.

Additionally, the officer told the court that his son also attends a special school in Nairobi and therefore his transfer to Lokutang’ in Turkana would negatively affect his educational pursuits.

However, in their reply, the AG, NPSC, and DCI argued that there was no hidden motive in the transfer of the officer to Turkana.

They informed the court that the transfer was carried out as per police standing orders, which permit the transfer of any officer, except the Deputy Inspector General, Director of DCI, and the IG, to serve in any part of the country.

The ruling is set to be a major win for most junior and senior officers serving under the National Police Service(NPS) who have often found themselves on the harsh end of targeted transfers.

Officers have argued in the past that such transfers are often initiated when they disagree with their seniors over work-related issues. 

In Kirimi’s case, the NPSC and DCI argued that the transfer followed a complaint from a member of the public, who accused the officer of unlawfully obtaining money from him and threatening to force him to withdraw the case.