1.I have considered the representations by the Counsels. The Order of 25/3/2026 was categorical. The Court directed the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondent to prepare, develop and publish within 90 days, Public Order Management Regulations to regulate and manage public demonstrations and picketing in exercise of the right under Article 37 of the Constitution of Kenya .
2.That directive was obtained from what the Court had observed first hand in the Petition. For long, many have died and been maimed while either trying to exercise that right to demonstrate and picket or while being innocent bystanders. One death is too many considering the history of the conduct of the 1st respondent and the officers of the 2nd respondent.
3.90 days expired on 24/6/2026. Today is 13 days over that period. There is nothing on record to show that the said directive was complied with. Learned Counsel Mr. Kajo has admitted as such. He requests for a few days to explain. If anything was being done and the 1st to 3rd respondent felt they would be unable to comply with the directive, nothing would have been easier than to file for extension of time before today.
4.This is blatant disobedience of a clear Court order. One disobedience is one too many. It is an affront to the rule of law. It is a breach of Article 10 of the Constitution . Court orders are not suggestions to be second guessed. There are processes of challenging orders that anyone feels is onerous.
5.The continued vacuum is dangerous. It was expected that the members of the 2nd respondent would not operate in a vacuum or in a lacunae where it is unknown how they are to meet those desirous to exercise their right under Article 37 of the Constitution of Kenya . That right is not a flowerly provision in our primary law. For now, it is not known or clear how the officers of the 2nd respondent are to operate during picketing. The 1st to 3rd respondent would not be permitted to operate as if this country has no laws. They are under the law. They must obey court orders.
6.Accordingly, since there is no reason on record why the 1st to 3rd respondents disobeyed the order of 25/3/2026, they are hereby summoned to appear before Court and show cause why action should not be taken against them for the contempt. Appearance to be on 21/7/2026 at 9.00am without fail.
It is so ordered.
2.That directive was obtained from what the Court had observed first hand in the Petition. For long, many have died and been maimed while either trying to exercise that right to demonstrate and picket or while being innocent bystanders. One death is too many considering the history of the conduct of the 1st respondent and the officers of the 2nd respondent.
3.90 days expired on 24/6/2026. Today is 13 days over that period. There is nothing on record to show that the said directive was complied with. Learned Counsel Mr. Kajo has admitted as such. He requests for a few days to explain. If anything was being done and the 1st to 3rd respondent felt they would be unable to comply with the directive, nothing would have been easier than to file for extension of time before today.
4.This is blatant disobedience of a clear Court order. One disobedience is one too many. It is an affront to the rule of law. It is a breach of Article 10 of the Constitution . Court orders are not suggestions to be second guessed. There are processes of challenging orders that anyone feels is onerous.
5.The continued vacuum is dangerous. It was expected that the members of the 2nd respondent would not operate in a vacuum or in a lacunae where it is unknown how they are to meet those desirous to exercise their right under Article 37 of the Constitution of Kenya . That right is not a flowerly provision in our primary law. For now, it is not known or clear how the officers of the 2nd respondent are to operate during picketing. The 1st to 3rd respondent would not be permitted to operate as if this country has no laws. They are under the law. They must obey court orders.
6.Accordingly, since there is no reason on record why the 1st to 3rd respondents disobeyed the order of 25/3/2026, they are hereby summoned to appear before Court and show cause why action should not be taken against them for the contempt. Appearance to be on 21/7/2026 at 9.00am without fail.
It is so ordered.