By Our Correspondent
NAIROBI, Kenya — A fresh legal battle has erupted over a high-profile land fraud case in Isiolo County after a resident filed a petition at Nairobi’s Milimani Law Courts challenging the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) abrupt decision to halt the prosecution of Isiolo Governor Abdi Guyo.
The petitioner, Stanely Kaliutha, a long-time resident of Isiolo with roots in Meru, has accused the DPP of gross misconduct and abuse of office, following the withdrawal of charges that had been recommended by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) against Governor Guyo and two other individuals.
At the centre of the dispute is a parcel of land identified as Ruiri/Rwarera/3999, which Kaliutha claims is rightfully his. In his petition, he alleges that the land was fraudulently acquired by Governor Guyo (named as the second interested party) in collusion with land officials, and irregularly registered under the governor’s name.
According to court filings, the disputed land has been occupied and developed by the Naituli family since 1984, a period during which Kaliutha asserts no contestation had arisen until the sudden registration of the land in the governor’s name.
An investigation launched by the DCI reportedly confirmed the fraudulent acquisition and recommended the prosecution of Governor Guyo, Nelson Kinyua Inanga (first interested party), and Erick Korir (third interested party). The DPP initially concurred with the findings and gave the green light for prosecution on 20 August 2024.
However, in a surprising twist, the DPP reversed this decision just over a month later. A letter dated 26 September 2024 announced the withdrawal of the charges, without any consultation with the complainant or disclosure of new evidence to justify the reversal.
Kaliutha, in his court submissions, has termed this about-turn a “blatant abuse of office” and a violation of constitutional rights, particularly his right to be heard as a complainant in a matter of public interest. He argues that the DPP’s actions contravene several key provisions of the Kenyan Constitution, including:
- Article 47 – right to fair administrative action
- Article 48 – right to access to justice
- Article 50(9) – the right of a victim to be informed and protected
- Article 157(11) – a requirement for the DPP to act in the public interest and without abuse of the legal process
In his petition, Kaliutha is seeking a declaration that the DPP’s actions were unconstitutional. He is asking the court to quash the decision to halt the prosecution, compel the public prosecutor to compensate him, and award general damages for breach of his constitutional rights.
The matter is currently before Justice Bahati Mwamuye, who on 29 April 2025 directed that all respondents and interested parties be served with the petition and accompanying documents by close of business on the same day, with proof of service to be filed by 30 April.
Justice Mwamuye further issued a detailed timeline for the proceedings:
- Respondents are to file responses by 16 May 2025
- The petitioner may file rejoinders and submissions by 30 May
- Written submissions in reply must be filed and served by 17 June
- Rejoinders to those submissions must be filed by 27 June
The matter is set for mention on 30 June 2025, when the court will confirm compliance with the procedural directions and consider a date for the highlighting of submissions or delivery of judgment.
This development raises serious questions about prosecutorial independence and transparency in Kenya’s justice system, particularly in high-stakes cases involving powerful political figures.
Would you like me to prepare a version of this article formatted for publication on a blog or news website?
