The case involving Deputy Inspector General Eliud Lagat and the late teacher and blogger Albert Ojwang is now being seen as a clear example of impunity and dishonesty from those in power. On June 16, 2025, DIG Lagat publicly claimed that he was stepping aside from his role so that investigations into Ojwang’s death could proceed without interference.
But just one day later, on June 17, court records and documents posted by the Nyakundi Report revealed that Lagat had actually taken an 18-day annual leave, approved by Inspector General Douglas Kanja.
This makes it look like the announcement was not genuine but instead meant to calm public anger.
Albert Ojwang died while in police custody after being arrested over a social media post that allegedly defamed DIG Lagat.
His death sparked protests, anger from civil society, and serious questions about police abuse and misuse of power. The fact that the man behind the complaint was also a senior officer only added to the pressure on the government to respond.
When Lagat said he would step aside, many thought it was a sign that the police were finally ready to take responsibility. But it now seems the public may have been misled.
By presenting a normal leave of absence as a step-down, the police leadership appears to have tried to control the story rather than actually address the issue.
This is not just about one man’s leave. It reflects a much bigger problem in Kenya’s leadership, where appearances are given more attention than truth.
People are angry because it shows a lack of seriousness in dealing with matters involving human rights and police killings. Some are now questioning whether DIG Lagat was ever really expected to be held accountable.
The Independent Policing Oversight Authority is still investigating the death of Albert Ojwang.
Several officers are already facing murder charges. But the return of Lagat to office just days after his so-called stepping aside has cast a long shadow over the process. It sends a message that even when lives are lost, senior officials can twist the truth and face no consequences.
For a country trying to build trust between the public and the police, this kind of behavior only pushes people further away.
What happened here is not just a mistake in communication. It is a deliberate misrepresentation meant to hide the truth. If those in charge cannot be honest about simple things like leave, how can they be trusted with matters of life and death?
This moment should force Kenyans to ask harder questions about who is protecting who, and whether justice is truly possible in a system that allows this level of dishonesty.
