5 October 2007: Police on Trial at Kenyan Public Hearings on Security

The recently concluded phase one of the Public Inquiry on Security in Kenya, which involved public hearings in Kisii, Kiambu and Nairobi, appeared to be a forum to bash the Kenya Police and Administration Police, while the core issue of organized criminal groups was studiously ignored.

The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) organized the hearings in response to a petition by the Kenya Human Rights Network (K-Hurinet) to conduct an inquiry into security. The first phase of the public inquiry on security was supposed to have focused on organized criminal gangs, but most of the witnesses who addressed the panel accused the police of an array of wrongs. It is unfortunate that the issue of gangs was sidelined in this way. There is an urgent need to address organized criminal gangs like the Munngiki that took Nairobi city and Central province by storm for the better part of the first half of this year. Another group causing considerable trouble is the Sungu Sungu group operating amongst the Kisii community of Nyanza province, south-west of Nairobi.

As if to implicitly confirm the existence of organized criminal gangs, the police were accused of colluding with criminals. Witnesses told how criminal gangs paid off key officers, who in turn facilitated the release of suspects after very short stay in police custody. Police were also accused of extorting cash from business people, particularly those who engaged in illegal trade. One case that was reported involved a criminal gang who conducted their business just a few metres from a police road-block. Another witness claimed that some rogue police were hiring out their official small arms to well connected criminals.

Speakers also pointed to instances in which police engaged in drinking sprees such that they were unable to respond to distress calls. The police were further accused of a general failure to respond when members of the public report cases of robbery with violence. It was also alleged that officers betrayed members of the public by informing criminals of reports of crimes logged with police. Witnesses spoke of living in fear after being threatened with dire consequences for reporting crimes to the police.

While the public carefully avoided mention of the criminal gangs that have terrorised their neighbourhoods, the police were accused of meting out unlawful punishments and conducting extra judicial killings. Some members of the public felt that, during the police crackdown on the outlawed Mungiki sect and its members in Nairobi and parts of Central province, their community was also targeted. Moving testimonies were heard over how the police conducted ruthless swoops, some involving shootings in cold blood, during their search for the Mungiki.

Police disciplinary procedures also came under the spotlight. There were complaints over perceptions that officers found to be guilty of infringements, or who performed their tasks in an inept manner, were simply transferred to other police stations. It was argued that ‘criminal police’ should be prosecuted and not transferred. Witnesses also stressed that senior officers should be held responsible, and where necessary punished, for the behaviour of those under their command. Further, the witnesses recommended that citizens should have the right to arrest rogue police. The witnesses appeared to be rightfully demanding more control over community policing as opposed to leaving the prerogative to the police and the state.

It must be said that not all of those who gave evidenced at the hearings were unsympathetic towards the police. Informed members of the public noted that the ratio between the police and the large population that they are supposed to take care of is not only unrealistic but also a security concern. While the international standard recommends one officer per 450 citizens, in some parts of Kenya the ratio is an incredible 1:6,500. Some witnesses also observed that the police lack the necessary tools (particularly patrol vehicles capable of dealing with rough terrain and poor infrastructure) to effectively conduct their duties and enhance security.

To some extent the witnesses made fundamental points regarding security situation in Kenya and what needs to be done. On the other hand, it must be kept in mind that the police force in Kenya has been making a deliberate effort to improve their image in the public domain. For instance, customer care desks have been set up in most police posts and stations. In addition, the police have in recent times drafted a comprehensive Kenya Police Reforms Framework which was followed by the Kenya Police Service Strategic Plan as well as the Administration Police Strategic Plan. The main problem lies not with the intentions outlined in these documents, but in the speed of implementation. Political will must be improved, and sustainable resources need to be allocated in the budget in order to speed up police reforms in Kenya. This is an essential step in addressing security in the country. Community policing is another key gap that needs to be addresses in all the parts of the country. As a concept, it is clearly envisaged in the above-mentioned documentation, but unfortunately most of the witnesses noted that very little effort was put toward making community policing a reality in all parts of the country.

In summary, the public hearings seemed to underscore fundamental challenges that must be addressed in order to achieve security in Kenya. For one thing, ‘criminal gangs’, whether composed of those in uniform or in civilian clothes, must be confronted. But the challenge is also a broader one. Other public vices need to be addressed as well. As one witness noted, “Insecurity and crime are blood sisters to corruption.” What is needed a multifaceted-approach towards improving human security in Kenya.

Augusta Muchai, Senior Researcher: Arms Management Programme, ISS Nairobi

DISCLAIMER