Charles Were murder: Aroko’s lawyers demand his release from police custody
The legal team representing Philip Nahashon Aroko, a person of interest in the death of the late Kasipul Member of Parliament (MP) Charles Ong’ondo Were, have filed a petition demanding that their client be produced in court dead or alive.
In the application at the Milimani High Court Criminal Division, lawyer Danstan Omari seeks to have the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) and the Inspector General of Police, Douglas Kanja, compelled to produce Aroko in any court immediately.
“Pending the hearing and determination of this application, this Honourable Court be pleased to direct the 1st respondent (DCI) and the 2nd Respondent (IG) either singularly or jointly with the other respondents (Attorney General (AG) and Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) to immediately and unconditionally present the applicant (Philip Aroko) before this court to be dealt with according to law,” part of the petition read.
Released unconditionally
Further, lawyer Omari seeks to have his client be released immediately and unconditionally from what he says is unlawful and illegal custody pending the hearing and determination of the application.
In an affidavit to support the petition, Omari states that his client denies any involvement in the tragic death of the Kasipul MP Were and has no relevant information regarding the same.
He also states that his client is willing and available to assist the investigative authorities in any lawful manner, including the provision of statements, attendance of interviews, or any other reasonable inquiry.
According to the court papers, Aroko, who is currently detained at Gigiri Police Station, was expected to be arraigned at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) court at 9:00 am, but the lawyers say he is yet to be produced in court.
Frustrations
Lawyer Omari also reveals that authorities have barred him, Aroko’s family and associates from accessing him or securing his release on police bond, citing frustrations from the police.
“Since his detention, attempts by his counsel, family members, and associates to access him or secure his release on police bond have been actively frustrated, further reinforcing the legitimate fear that the respondents (DCI, IG, AG and DPP) intend to protract his detention beyond constitutionally permissible limits,” Lawyer Omari stated.
He also argues that his client is entitled to be treated in accordance with the Constitution, particularly Article 49(1) (f), which demands that any person arrested be presented before a court of law within 24 hours.
