Court Rules On Student Who Posted AI-Generated Ruto’s Coffin
A university student convicted of sharing fake information in an AI-generated graphic depicting a funeral procession in purported reference to President William Ruto has been acquitted.
On February 19, the Milimani Law Courts cleared 24-year-old David Oaga Mokaya after prosecutors failed to prove he was responsible for spreading false information on President Ruto.
Win for University student who posted Ruto’s coffin as he is acquitted for lack of evidence
— Court Helicopter News (@CourtHelicopter) February 19, 2026
David Mokaya has been acquitted of charges relating to the alleged publication of an image depicting President William Ruto’s coffin on X.
In delivering its judgment, the court held that… pic.twitter.com/17Tt5yH2ck
Mokaya, a Moi University student also known as Landlord on X, was arrested in November 2024 for uploading a digitally modified image online.
The image, published on November 13, 2024, featured a casket wrapped with the Kenyan flag, led by military officers, with a caption implying that it depicted Ruto’s burial procession.
He was charged under Section 23 of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, No. 5 of 2018, with disseminating false information likely to instill fear or alarm.
The prosecution claimed the post misled members of the public and could have caused panic, while claiming that the content crossed the threshold from satire to criminal behavior.
Judgment Day: Will the Student Who Posted President Ruto’s Coffin Image Be Convicted? pic.twitter.com/Dr39PvYJMl
— Court Helicopter News (@CourtHelicopter) February 18, 2026
However, the court found insufficient evidence to explicitly link Mokaya to the crime, acquitting him and dismissing the accusation under cybercrime legislation.
What Kenyan Law Says About Abusing The President
Article 33 of the Constitution provides free expression, allowing citizens to seek, receive, and transmit information subject to reasonable and fair constraints.
At the same time, Article 143 shields a sitting President from civil or criminal proceedings for acts performed in office, granting personal immunity during their tenure.
ALSO READ:
- Israel Intercepts, Arrests 175 Flotilla Crew As Spain’s Meloni Demands Their Release
- EXPLAINER: Why Chamas Can’t Sue In Their Own Name Against A Member
- IEBC Registers 2.6 Million New Voters In 30 Days, Ethekon Lauds Youths’ Drive
- Gov’t Sends KDF To Kasarani, Other Flood-Hit Areas As Met Department Issues Warning
- Ruto Set To Address Tanzanian Parliament Next Week
Under Sections 94 and 96 of the Penal Code, insulting conduct may attract penalties if it causes a breach of the peace or incitement, while Article 33 of the Constitution protects freedom of expression subject to justifiable limitations.
Past attempts to criminalise insults against public officials under Section 132 of the Penal Code were struck down in 2017 by the High Court, which declared the provision unconstitutional.
The court ruled that Section 132 was vague, overly broad, and unjustifiably limited free speech, marking a turning point in how criticism of public officials is handled.
More serious offences, including treason under Section 40 of the Penal Code, remain in force, but they address violent intent or the overthrow of the government rather than mere online insults.
Court Rules On Student Who Posted AI-Generated Ruto’s Coffin
