Eliud Lagat is under scrutiny after the High Court ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear a petition challenging his directive to step aside from office following the controversial death of blogger Albert Ojwang.
The ruling exposes Lagat’s attempt to treat the matter as an internal employment issue rather than a constitutional and legal question, raising concerns about his accountability in one of the most sensitive cases in recent memory.
Through his lawyer, Cecil Miller, Lagat argued that stepping aside was an administrative and employment matter and that the High Court lacked jurisdiction.
Miller claimed that the case concerned only internal employer-employee relations within the National Police Service and should therefore be handled by the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
This approach appeared aimed at avoiding closer scrutiny of Lagat’s role in the aftermath of Ojwang’s death.
Justice Chacha Mwita rejected this argument, stating that the issues raised go beyond ordinary employment matters.
The judge emphasized that the petition involves constitutional interpretation and the legality of decisions made by the National Police Service Commission. According to the ruling, the High Court can examine whether Lagat’s actions as Deputy Inspector General were constitutional and lawful.
This decision directly challenges any attempt to shield him from accountability by framing the matter as a technical employment dispute.
The petition was filed by Eliud Matindi, who argued that the process directing Lagat to step aside involved fundamental constitutional questions.
Matindi stated that public officers cannot be forced to vacate office without proper legal frameworks or due process. He also noted that Lagat’s continued presence in the DIG office, despite notifying the Commission of his stepping aside, lacked legal justification.
These points suggest that Lagat has resisted stepping aside at a time when transparency and accountability were essential, particularly given the seriousness of Ojwang’s death.
With the High Court dismissing Lagat’s objection, the case will proceed to a full hearing scheduled for November 17, 2025.
The hearing will scrutinize whether Lagat acted within the law or attempted to evade accountability.
The court’s ruling reinforces the principle that high-ranking officials cannot avoid legal and constitutional responsibility, even when facing sensitive cases that attract public attention.
Lagat’s effort to minimize the matter as an employment issue now faces direct examination, and his decisions in relation to Ojwang’s death are likely to come under detailed legal review.
This development makes it clear that the questions surrounding Eliud Lagat’s actions are not just administrative but concern the transparency and accountability expected of senior police officers.
The legal process will determine whether he can continue in his role while facing serious allegations linked to one of Kenya’s most high-profile cases.
