TWV Court Reporter
Nominated Senator Hezena Lemaletian has obtained temporary restraining orders against her estranged boyfriend, Musa Hussein Lenyumpa, following explosive allegations of harassment, threats, and false claims of marriage.In a ruling delivered by Magistrate F. Terer, the court barred Mr Lenyumpa from assaulting, threatening, harassing, or otherwise interfering with the Senator’s safety and wellbeing. The orders also prohibit him from using her name, image, or likeness for personal, political, or commercial purposes; publishing any information about her; or accessing her home or workplace until further direction is given.
Through her lawyer, Danstan Omari, Senator Lemaletian told the court that she and Mr Lenyumpa were engaged only in a Samburu customary courtship, which she later revoked. She stressed that no dowry was paid and that the Ksh100,000 “ropiyani e loip”, a traditional token symbolising the “shadow” of a woman, was not dowry but a gesture of intent, which she has since returned in full.The Senator claims that after she ended the courtship, Mr Lenyumpa became physically violent and verbally abusive. She alleges that on one occasion he assaulted her so severely that she suffered a nosebleed, and later threatened a good Samaritan who tried to assist her.
In court filings, she accused him of issuing death threats and spreading false claims, both in public and on social media, that they are married. She alleges he has enlisted bloggers and social media influencers to publish defamatory content, tarnishing her reputation and placing her safety, privacy, and political career in jeopardy.
According to the Senator, Samburu customs dictate that dowry consists of eight cows, an offering she says Mr Lenyumpa never made. She maintains that the relationship was at the courtship stage, during which either party may request elders to revoke consent to marry. She exercised this right after deciding not to proceed.
Her urgent application, heard ex parte in the first instance, seeks to make the restraining orders permanent pending a full hearing. She argues that immediate intervention is necessary to prevent further harm to her wellbeing and professional standing.The matter will return to court on 22 September 2025, when both parties will present arguments on whether the interim orders should be extended, varied, or lifted.
