SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Mohamed & another (In Respect of Mohamed Abdulmalik - Subject) v Commissioner of Police & another (Miscellaneous Criminal Application 732 of 2007) [2007] KEHC 229 (KLR) (Crim) (21 November 2007) (Ruling)

[2007] KEHC 229 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
229
Citation
[2007] KEHC 229 (KLR)
Decided
21 November 2007
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeHabeas Corpus ApplicationPostureAppeal from the original trial outcomeCoramJB OJWANG, Ojwang
Holding

The application for habeas corpus could not be sustained as the subject was no longer within the jurisdiction of the Kenyan courts.

Facts

The subject, Abdulmalik Rajab Mohamed, was allegedly unlawfully detained by Kenyan authorities and subsequently transferred out of jurisdiction without due process.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for habeas corpus could be sustained in circumstances where the subject was no longer within the jurisdiction of the Kenyan courts.
  2. Whether the respondents, having released the subject from custody, bore any further obligation to account for the subject’s removal from the jurisdiction.
  3. Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to entertain additional constitutional claims within a habeas corpus application.
  4. Whether the actions of State officials in removing the subject of a habeas corpus application from the jurisdiction of Kenyan courts violated the subject’s constitutional rights.
  5. Whether the request to summon specific government officials to provide information related to the habeas corpus application was tenable in law.
  6. Whether legislation regulating the executive’s discretion in removing individuals from the jurisdiction was necessary to safeguard constitutional rights.

Reasoning

The court held that since the subject was physically absent from Kenya, a writ of habeas corpus could not be enforced. The court acknowledged constitutional violations but dismissed the application as spent.

Outcome

The application for habeas corpus was declared spent and not to be heard any further.

Orders

  • The application for orders summoning certain officers of Government to provide information in relation to the Habeas corpus application of 18th October, 2007 is refused.
  • The Habeas corpus application itself, dated and filed on 18th October, 2007 is hereby declared spent, and is not to be heard any further.
  • The applicants may make a suitable constitutional application in the High Court.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case