May 7, 2026
DIG Lagat Claims Only DPP Can Prosecute Him, Not The Court

DIG Lagat Claims Only DPP Can Prosecute Him, Not The Court

Eliud Lagat, the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police, claims that the decision to charge him in connection with the death of blogger Albert Omondi Ojwang is solely up to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), not the courts.

Lagat, through his lawyer Cecil Miller, claims that ordering the DPP to file charges against him would constitute an illegal assumption of constitutionally authorized authorities.

Furthermore, it would create a dangerous precedent, undermining prosecutorial independence.

“The petitioners’ prayer to have this court compel the DPP to prosecute the 11th Respondent is an improper attempt to take over the functions of independent institutions,” the submissions read in part.

“This court cannot declare someone guilty without a trial nor direct the DPP to prosecute absent evidence of constitutional failure.”

Lagat, who has denied any role in Ojwang’s alleged arrest, torture, and death, claims that the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) and the DPP investigated the case and found no evidence linking him to the occurrence.

According to court documents, the IPOA conducted thorough investigations, and the DPP charged only those who were found guilty after examining the material.

He claims that he willingly stepped back from his duties to allow for unrestricted investigations and that his ongoing employment does not violate any constitutional mandate.

“The blanket allegation that I am a prime suspect is defamatory and unsupported by any investigative finding,” Lagat submits.

ALSO READ:

“The law does not impute liability simply because of rank or office, absent proof of personal involvement.”

“It is important to note that the 11th Respondent was not present at the scene, did not issue any unlawful instructions, and his role as DIG was purely administrative and command-based,” reads court papers.

“He did not engage in operational conduct relevant to the incident.”

He claims that the Petitioner’s assertions that he is responsible for the teacher’s detention, torture, and death are unsupported by direct, circumstantial, or inferential evidence.

DIG Lagat Claims Only DPP Can Prosecute Him, Not The Court

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *