Month: January 2015


Posted on

Home Bay Member of Parliament George Peter Opondo Kaluma, lawyer John Wamiti Njagi and businesswoman Florence Seyanoi Kibera alias Dorothy Seanoi Moschion at Milimani law court where they were charged with conspiracy to defraud on Thursday 29/01/2015.


Home Bay Member of Parliament George Peter Opondo Kaluma was on Thursday charged
afresh with obtaining over Sh 300,000 from a businessman by false pretenses over disputed land.
The MP appeared before Nairobi chief magistrate Hannah Ndung’u, jointly charged with lawyer John Wamiti Njagi and businesswoman Florence Seyanoi Kibera alias Dorothy Seanoi Moschion with conspiracy to defraud.
Kaluma was initially charged alone last year, but the prosecution later consolidated the two cases since the facts and witnesses are the same.
In the first count, Kaluma, Njagi and Kibera are charged that on diverse dates between January 16 and February 29, 2012 at unknown place within Nairobi County, jointly conspired with intent to defraud by
offering to subdivide and sell by registration of agreement of sale at the Lands Ministry, a one acre portion of land parcel No.5892/22 situated at Ololua Ridge, Karen to Deborah Achieng Aduda and Rene John Dierkx.
Kaluma is accused of obtaining Sh 313,000 from businessman Constantine George Sphikas by falsely pretending that he was in position to finalize processing and registration at the Lands ministry a lease agreement for the lease of land parcel No 5892/22 not encumbered by any mortgage in Ololua Ridge, Karen.
Kibera was separately accused of obtaining Sh 6 million from Constantine George Sphikas by false pretences.
Wamiti was charged with obtaining Sh 25,000 from Deborah Achieng Aduda and Rene John Dierkx as legal fees by false pretending that his was in position to prepare, finalize and register at the Lands ministry an agreement of sale capable of registration for the purchase of a one acre portion of land to be subdivided from land parcel No.5892/22. He is further accused of obtaining Sh 3 million by false pretences.
The magistrate directed the case to be heard on 26 of June.


Posted on

Nyandarua nominated MCAs address the press at Thompson’s Falls in Nyahururu on April 23, 2013. Fifteen of them lost their seats last Friday. Photo/File.
Supreme Court has suspended the revocation of Nyandarua Members of County Assembly whose nomination was dismissed by the court of appeal.
Justice Professor Jackton Ojwang, said that pending further orders of the court, there shall be no execution of the court of appeal judgment which rendered the fifteen MCA jobless.
The judge said that the members shall remain in office until the petition before the Supreme Court is heard and determined.
Justice Ojwang further ordered that no gazettement of new nominees shall be made and no further action will take place until appropriate directions are given by the highest court in land.
The aggrieved MCA through their lawyer Charles Kihara, told the judge that the fifteen members were nominated by Party of National Alliance following the 4 March 2013 general election and their names were forwarded to the Party for consideration.
The decision to nominate the 15 was opposed by their political rivals who subsequently filed judicial review application in high court which was dismissed.
Justice Roseline Nambuye, Mohamed Warsame and Agnes Murgor in their judgment dismissed the high court judgment which was in favor of the 15 MCA and directed that fresh nomination be carried out within seven days.
Justice Ojwang heard that the appellate court did not give guideline on how the fresh nomination should be conducted as has been the case before and the common practice of the court.
Mr Kihara told the Supreme Court judge, that the appellate judges acted without jurisdiction by delivering a judgment which effectively removed the validly nominated MCA for Nyandarua County.
The lawyer submitted that the three judges patently breached the provisions of the constitution which provide that the removal member of Parliament, Senate and MCAs must be filed by way of election petition and not judicial review as in the case which the court of appeal has made determination over.
Justice Ojwang directed that application challenging the judgment of the court of appeal be heard on priority basis.


Posted on Updated on

Narok Senator Stephen Ole Ntutu and MPs Moitalel ole Kenda, Jonah Ng’eno, Kolei Olememei and Patrick Ntutu at Milimani law courts on Thursday 29/01/2015.

Narok Senator Stephen Ole Ntutu and 4 MPs have been released on a personal bond terms of 500,000 each as they await charges for the violence that has taken place in the county.

The five leaders from Narok County were charged for their role in demonstration in Narok Monday which led to the death of two people and injuries to many others.

Earlier, Director of Public Prosecutions Keriako Tobiko had urged the court to release them on bond saying he had received information that chaos had erupted in Narok on Thursday morning as residents protested the arrest of the politicians.
During the protests, one person was injured while businesses remained closed as angry youths barricaded roads leading to Narok Town.
The four though argued for their release and were ordered to deposit the money, as well as report to the Muthaiga Police Station every Monday until the case is over.
Ntutu together with MPs Moitalel ole Kenda, Jonah Ng’eno, Kolei Olememei and Patrick Ntutu were detained by the CID Wednesday evening for their part in the illegal demonstrations over apparent misappropriation of funds by the Narok County Governor.

The MPs and Ntutu had been asked by Interior CS Joseph Nkaissery to head to the CID and record statements over the demonstrations that had been declared illegal by his office and the police.

They did so Wednesday and recorded statements at the Muthaiga Police Station and despite openly availing themselves, were detained for further investigations.Tension has gripped Narok town after the area leaders defied the government’s ban on rallies and demonstrations and staged a demo in the town.
Senator Ntutu led other legislators and residents from the County in storming the governor’s office over allegations of misappropriation of funds collected from the Maasai Mara Game Reserve by the county government.
Ntutu said that the demonstrations would go on as they are not a threat to the security but they rather want to present a petition to the governor Kuntai ole Tunai.
Narok governor Kuntai ole Tunai has since dismissed the claims as baseless and political and aimed at slowing down the development that he has started in the area.
Nkaissery had banned rallies and demonstrations in the region, saying that they could result in violent confrontations and loss of lives.
There is currently a heavy presence of security personnel in and around the town.
The five are required to maintain peace as they await the mention of their case on February 13.
Earlier, Director of Public Prosecutions Keriako Tobiko had urged the court to release them on bond saying he had received information that chaos had erupted in Narok on Thursday morning as residents protested the arrest of the politicians.
During the protests, one person was injured while businesses remained closed as angry youths barricaded roads leading to Narok Town.
Those arrested together with Senator Ntutu were MPs Johana Ngeno (EmurwaDikir), Moitalel Kenta (Narok North), Korei Lemein (Narok South) and Patrick Ntutu (Narok West).


Posted on

Lawyer Kethi Kilonzo for Kibwezi West Member of Parliament Dr Patrick Musimba who has moved to court seeking orders to block Kenya Railway Corporation (KRC) from renewing its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the construction of-multi billion shillings Standard Gauge Railway.

Kibwezi West Member of Parliament Dr Patrick Musimba has applied to the high court seeking orders to block Kenya Railway Corporation (KRC) from renewing its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the construction of multi billion shillings Standard Gauge Railway.
The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) is about to new the licence for KRC in the month of February and the MP claim that there was violation of his constituent’s right when NEMA conducted assessment.
Dr Musimba says that the Standard Gauge Railway will be passing through his constituency in Makueni County and if the same is allowed will contravene and threaten the rights of the local people.
” The petitioner and the residents of Kibwezi West Constituency have been denied meaningful participation in arriving at the EIA that is acceptable to all
The legislator through lawyer Kethi Kilonzo, argues that to date it is not known levels of air, noise and vibration pollution that will result from the construction work.
Kethi says that effect from the construction when the Environmental Impact Assessment has been properly conducted wills adversely aff4ect public health and the environment itself where people of Kibwezi are inhabitants.
The lawyer says that EIA license initially given was done in breach of the constitution and the laws and same ought not to be renewed, pending the hearing and determination of the applicant’s petition.
The lawyer will be urging the court to seriously consider the issues raised by MP from the interest of the local people who will be affected the poor EAI.
” There exist imminent threat to the lives of the people given the location of Kibwezi and its County serious issue of the constitutional violation must be taken into account “the lawyer argued.
The high has jurisdiction to intervene on matter that affect the right of the people, she said.


Posted on

Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) lawyers James Orengo, Anthony Oluoch ( center) and Director of Public Prosecution Keraiko Tobiko at Milimani law courts during the first day of the hearing of the petition challenging the Security Laws (Amendment) Act 2014 that was filed by Cord last year (28 Wednesday 2015).
Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) has renewed their call over the enactment of the controversial Security Amendment Act 2014 that is meant to curb rising insecurity unleashed by terrorism as being unlawfully and illegally passed by parliament.
Opposition submitted that the controversial security laws amendment bill was passed unprocedurally and without public participation.
CORD through lawyer James Orengo told a five judge bench that President Uhuru Kenyatta was misleads to assent to the bill which never followed the due process of the law as provided by the constitution.
Orengo told the bench presided by Judge Isaac Lenaola and Mumbi Ngugi, Hilary Chemitei, Hedwig Ongudi and Louis Onguto heard that the Speaker of the National Assembly Justin Muturi was partisan in the chaotic debate that resulted in the passage of the bill last December.
“The speaker of the national assembly contravened the constitution by failing to refer the Bill to senate so as the two speakers could have made a determination as required by law” said Orengo.
Orengo further argued that public participation was restricted because the time allocated was inadequate and committee meetings were held at odd hours in contravention with the constitution.
“There was no debate in the House as witnessed by the public, the amendment bill was rushed and speeded without giving public participation” Orengo added.
The Bill sought to amend several provisions of the public order Act (cap5), penal code, extradition, criminal procedure code, registration of persons, evidence, firearms rent restriction Acts among others undermine and violate the constitution.
The court heard the Bill contains several offensive provision namely Section 4,5,12,16,25,26,29,34,48,56,58 and 64 Security Law (Amendment)Act 2014 of the security thus it breached the constitution.
Cord lawyer James Orengo sought the court to halt the operationalized of the Section 8,9 of the Public Order Act, Section 66A(1) and (2) of the Penal Code and Section 42 and 344(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code the Bill unconstitutional.
Justice Lenaola led bench heard that the law passed contravened the constitution and the same cannot be presumed to be good law.
They heard that the amendment contains offensive provisions and affect lives of Kenyans if the same is allowed to come into operational.
The Bill sought to amend several provisions of the public order Act (cap5), penal code, extradition, criminal procedure code, registration of persons, evidence, firearms rent restriction Acts among others undermine and violate the constitution.
The court heard that the debate was rushed and hastened and the Bill was steamrolled and speed in the assembly thus violating the principle that the minority must have their say even if the majority has their way because of the tyranny of numbers enjoyed by one side of the house.
Court of Appeal dismissed an application by AG seeking to stop the suspended the operation of eight sections of the anti-terrorism law.
Appellate judges Daniel Musinga, Patrick Kiage and Agnes Murgor ruled that Attorney-General Githu Muigai had not proved that the suspension of the clauses had created a vacuum in fighting terrorism.
The new regulation relating to arresting a person and withholding him or her for period of 90 days without explanation should not be applied.
The appellate court held that there was no vacuum in the constitution that would stop the government from enforcing the law in regard to the section suspended by Justice George Odunga.
Justice Odunga found that new regulation relating to limiting number of refugees to the county is discriminative in nature and in consistence to international instruments and treaties to which Kenya is signatory.
The learned Judge upheld the position of United Nations Refugee Convention and Protocol that relates to protection and non-discrimination of refugees should be allowed to seek asylum without necessarily limiting their numbers as it in the case under new laws.
National Intelligence Services will not interfere with the privacy of individuals as proposed under the new Act, the court said this new amendment needs to be investigated and determination made.
The court further put on hold the anti-terrorism Act, saying the way in which the provisions are framed is too broad and imprecise and may be abused and recklessly applied beyond mischief as its expected.
According to Orengo the Bill 2014 was published in a special gazette supplement No 163 under the hand of Chairman on Administration and national Security Asman Kamama.
The Clerk of the National Assembly on December 10 published in the local dallies an advertisement intended to be an invitation to the public to present their memoranda on the proposed Bill.
The notice was in violation of express provision of the constitution and in particular Article 10(2)(a) and 118(1) (b) of the constitution as it did not afford the people any meaningful opportunity to participate in the bill by giving a notice the same day the purported public participation was to commence.
“Under Article 132(2)(a)(c) and (e) the head of state has an obligation and duty to respect, uphold and safeguard the constitution promote and enhance the unity of the nation and to ensure the protection of human rights and fundamental freedom and the rule of law” added Orengo.
The hearing will continue tomorrow.


Posted on

Nairobi Senator Mike Sonko swearing on oath at Milimani law courts when he was testifying on a case which he filed seeking the compensation for Sinai fire victim that occurred on 12 September 2011
Nairobi Senator Mike Sonko has told a Nairobi High Court that he has spent over Sh 4.9 million helping Sinai fire Victims who were affected by the fire.
Sonko appeared before Justice David Majanja told the court he doesn’t want any compensation for that money but he wants the Government to compensate the victims of 2011 Sinai Fire that left many disabled.
He further told the court that it was due to the negligence by the Kenya Pipeline Company that the fire occurred and destroyed the lives of so many victims who were left hopeless after the fire burnt everything.
He accused county government for poor drainage and bad roads that were not passable, making it impossible for the fire engines which arrived late to contain the fire.
“There were no good roads where fire fighter vehicles could have passed, the sewage also drained water to the victim’s habitat, “said Sonko.
The fuel had leaked into a storm drain from the Nairobi-Mombasa pipeline, the Kenya Pipeline Company said in a statement.
The senator, who filed the petition for the Sinai victims seeking compensation for them, wants the court to order the government to compensate them.
Approximately 100 people were killed in the fire and at least 116 others were hospitalized with varying degrees of burns on 12 September 2011 on the Sinai fire tragedy over what the senator terms as negligence by the Kenya Pipeline Company
Earlier on the day, eleven years old boy who testified in the same case painfully narrated how his life changed after the year 2011 where he succumbed fire injuries.
He told the court that he was sent home by the teacher to go and come back with the school fees where he came across the fire and he fell down.

Without knowing what to do as the sparks of fire and deep smoke was all over he tried to scream in vain as everybody was running for safety here and there.

“As I reached home I can’t tell who lit the fire but all I can remember is seeing the fire all over my body, I cannot play again, I have headaches every now and then and even my performance in school deteriorated, “added the boy

Rebecca Ndeta who also testified in the same said she lost her one year baby during the fire, she said that she had left her baby in the house when she heard the bhang outside and left to see what was happening.

“When I saw the smoke from outside I ran to the house to save baby, upon coming outside the house I can’t remember what trespassed because I found myself at Kenyatta National hospital,” said Rebecca.

Rebecca told the court that she is not employed and her life has become so difficult, she urged the court to help them receive justice and compensation.

Nairobi Senator Mike Sonko was also at the court as he escorted a young boy who had burns all over his body.

Many of the victims are seeking the courts intervention so that they can be compensated, they argue that they had not received any notice from the Government that their Sinai plots were not fit for human habitat.

“For me to build t house at that place I had received a letter from the area Chief who confirmed that the plot was mine, I put my blame on Kenya Pipeline Authority because the oil belonged to them,” He said.

She told the magistrate that her life changed because she used to work and get little money for her life expenses.

“My properties were destroyed, many children and people who did not know me before always run away when they see me, she added.

The woman said she has not received any assistant from the Government since then, she said she don’t have the documents of the ownership of the plot as they were all burnt.

“Up to this moment I don’t know the cause of the fire but I blame Kenya Pipeline because the Kenya Pipeline Sewage is not very far from our place,”she added.

Sarah Njoki yet another witness who was at the court said she was preparing breakfast when the incident occurred, she said but when she came out of the house she received burns.

The only thing she said she could remember was being at the Hospital with burns all over her body, she said She Stayed at Kenyatta National Hospital for a period of two weeks.

“Two of my sister’s children died but mine survived, from that day we became enemies with my sister who has the documents that the chief gave us,” she said.
According to Her, Nairobi Senator Mike sonko payed for her hospital bill which was over Sh120,000.


Posted on


Kenya Union of Post-Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET) National Chairman Omboko Milemba, Secretary General Akello Misori (centre) and The Kenya National Union of Teachers (Knut) National Chairman Mudzo Nzili, at Milimani commercial court on January 28 Monday 1015 after industrial court declined to suspend consent orders that ended up the national strike.

Industrial Court has declined to suspend consent orders that called of teachers’ strike.
Justice Nduma Nderi directed Teachers Service Commission to file its response by Wednesday.

The Teachers Service Commission (TSC) was expected to file its response to teachers’ demands by today.
However on Friday last week the commission moved to court claiming the Industrial Court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to exclusively hear a salary dispute involving public officers.

The commission filed an urgent application seeking to suspend the orders that called off the teachers’ the two-week strike.

“The court orders if implemented will further occasion a miscarriage of justice to non-parties to who are directly affected by the said orders including the Ministry of Education, Labour and National Treasury,” contends TSC.

TSC through its lawyer Allan Stima requested for more time saying the issues raised by Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) and Kenya Union of Post-Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET) were weighty and

Justice Nderi ruled that all parties in the economic dispute fully comply with the consent orders entered on January 14 between the parties pending the hearing and determination of the matter.

“This matter is still in the hands of KUPPET, KNUT and TSC until the court writes its judgment but should the parties agree on the contentious issues raised nothing will stop the parties involved from entering an agreement before even the dispute is heard in court,” Justice Nderi ruled.

Justice Nderi said TSC, Salaries Remuneration Commission (SRC) and Central Planning and Monitoring Unit (CPMU) are at liberty to file their submissions after which the court will arbitrate the process.

“If all the parties agree to sit down and arbitrate over then matter will shall never be experiencing the endless strike this country has been subjected to in the past,” justice Nderi said.

He directed TSC to file its response by Wednesday while SRC expected to respond by February 9.

The Central Planning and Monitoring Unit (CPMU) was directed to analyze both the Union’s joint memorandum and the submissions by TSC and SRC and file its response on or before February 23 when the court will issue further directions.

He said it is after CPMU responds that the court will fix a hearing date of the economic dispute.

“It is the CPMU report that will provide a guideline that will enable the court to arrive at a just decision. So I urge all parties to comply and file their responses on time without failure,” Justice Nderi said.

Justice noted that the court was arbiter in the judicial process and had not assumed the role of the employer (TSC) nor that of the union’s demands.

“If the course of engagement with CPMU the parties arrive at a consensus then we do not need to go into full hearing since parties can go ahead and implement what has been agreed on,” the judge said.


Posted on

Senior counsel James Orengo for Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) at Supreme Court where the Appellate court declined to reinstate the eight suspended clauses on the controversial Security Amendment Act 2014 that is meant to curb rising insecurity unleashed by terrorism.
Government has suffered a major blow after the Appellate court declined to reinstate eight suspended clauses of the controversial Security Laws.
Appellate judges Daniel Musinga, Patrick Kiage and Agnes Murgor ruled on Friday that Attorney-General Githu Muigai had not proved that the suspension of the clauses had created a vacuum in fighting terrorism.
“We decline to grant the orders sought by the applicant and dismiss the application dated 6th January, 2015. We make no order as to costs.” Said the judges.
Attorney General Prof. Githu Muigai had appealed against suspension of the clauses claiming Justice George Odunga had erred in his judgment to suspend the laws.
“Whether by granting the conservatory orders the learned judge of the High Court erred in law and in fact in his interpretation of Article 23 of the Constitution” said Prof. Githu in his appeal.The case will now be heard by a five judge bench that was constituted by the chief justice.
In the appeal that had been filed by the attorney general, the court heard that high court judge George Odunga erred in law when he issued orders staying the implementation of the eight security bill clauses.
The AG had claimed that that the judge failed to consider the terrorist threats the country was facing and which the new law was meant to address.
However in its ruling the appellate court led by Judge Daniel Musinga said there was no vacuum in law and therefore dismissed the appeal by the Ag.Court of appeal ruled that the appeal by the AG had no merit.
Among the issues that were raised before the court was whether Judge George Odunga erred in law and if he had the jurisdiction to suspend the clauses as a single judge among others. The court suspended clauses 12, 16, 26, 29, 48, 56, 58 and 64 pending hearing of the case filed by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy and human rights lobbyists.
Justice George Odunga ruled that sections of the new Act raised questions of human rights violations.
Attorney General Githu Muigai challenged the suspension of eight clauses of the controversial Security Amendment Act 2014 that is meant to curb rising insecurity unleashed by terrorism..
AG filed a notice appeal against the January 2 decision by High Court Judge George Odunga following petitions by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (Cord) and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR).
In his application, the Attorney General argues the high court does not have power to suspend legislation that has been lawfully sanctioned by the National Assembly and asserted to by the President without justifiable reasons. The law can only invalidated by a three-Judge constitutional bench appointed by the Chief Justice upon receiving valid grounds regarding the short-comings or excesses of the law, he said.
President Uhuru Kenyatta signed into law the controversial legislation on December 19 following unprecedented mayhem in the House. Parliament enjoys exclusive power to enact laws that are presumed to be lawful and the High Court can only intervene when there is evidence of interference with freedoms and liberties protected by the Constitution, Prof. Githu says.
The Attorney General claimed the new law does not violate the fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights but opposition groups have condemned the tough regulations, among which allow security agents to hold suspects without charge for up to 90 days.
Todys ruling has left the fate of the tough controversial security bill under the hands of five judge bench appointed by chief justice Willy Mutunga to hear the petition filed by Coalition for Reform and Democracy (CORD) challenging Security laws (amendment) Act 2014 in the next 12 days.
Presiding Judge Isaac Lenaola said the matter will be heard on January 28, 29 and 30.
The bench consists presiding judge Isaac Lenaola,Mumbi Ngugi, Hilary Chemitei, Hedwig Ongu’di and Louis Onguto.
The bench should be able to deliver the judgment on or before February 13, 2015.


Posted on


The director of Kenya School of Law Professor P.L.O Lumumba who has been summoned to appear in court to show cause why they should not send to jail for disobeying a court order.

High court has summoned the director of Kenya School of Law Professor P.L.O Lumumba and Secretary Council of Legal Education Professor Kulundu Bitonye to appear in court to show cause why they should not send to jail for disobeying a court order required them to admit six students to the institution.
Justice George Odunga issued the orders, after the applicants informed the court that they had not been admitted has court ordered on April 4. Last year
Juliet Wanjiru Njoroge, Vincent Omondi Owuor, Solomon Wachira Ngari, Anthony Eregae Elaini, Elibeth Nanjenro Were and Kelvin Akonya were discontinued their advocates training programme for the academic year 2014/2015.
The aggrieved students through their lawyer Steve Nzaku immediately moved to court seeking orders to quash the decision by the management of the school to revoke their admission letters.
Justice Odunga granted their application and issued orders quashing the decision to expel them.
” The applicants were no longer students of the University but were students of the school provisionally in my view by the said admission they had acquired some rights and were therefore entitled to be treated fairly” judge said.
The order requiring the director of the school and the secretary of legal council were served personally on them on April 7, but they never acted has ordered by the court.
Justice Odunga said that court orders are not made in vain and are meant to be complied; saying that person disobeying the same must face the consequence of the law.
The judge said in his ruling that he was surprised at the interpretation of the court order by the two eminent professors of law who are in-charge of the Kenya School of Law an institution of higher learning tasked with the training of lawyers in the country.
He said that the court can not comprehend why the secretary whose in-charge of preparing guidelines for the conduct of such training could disobey the court order.
The two are expected to appear in person in court on February 3 for the contempt proceedings against them.

click headline to share.


Posted on


The three major media house who has been restrained by the court from airing advertisement advising their viewers against acquiring Star Times and Gotv set top boxes to continue accessing local content in digital
High court has issued temporary orders restraining the, three major Media houses from airing advertisement advising their viewers against acquiring Star Times and Gotv set top boxes to continue accessing local content in digital quality as reality on analogue switch off continues to manifest in Nairobi and its environs.
Justice Alfred Mabeya ordered Royal Media Services, Nation Media Group and Standard Group to stop airing or publishing information to the effect that GOTV is carrying their content without their consent and thereby infringing on their copyright.
The three media houses were also barred from publishing any defamatory statements against, GOtv whether on their television stations or by ‘whatsoever means published
The three media houses have been in protracted court battles which has occasioned the delay in digital migration until the government decided it was going ahead to implement the switchover anyway.
They have accused GOtv and Star times of carrying their channels illegally and have cautioned viewers from purchasing their set top boxes. It has been reported that they want Kenyans to wait for their own decoders which they are bringing under the Africa Digital Network consortium.
However, GOtv in a statement to the press said it carried the three media houses channels under the stipulation of the Kenya Communications Amendment Act.
It claimed all premium TV providers are obligated by the regulator the Communications authority of Kenya to carry local channels.
“It has come to our attention that four (4) Free-To-Air stations namely Citizen, KTN, NTV and QTV are currently running an infomercial on their platforms specifically advising consumers against purchasing GOtv set top boxes for carrying their content without consent,” reads part of the statement.
In a press statement issued by GOtv General Manager Felix Kyengo on Sunday, He assured Kenyans that the company is operating within the confines of the laws of Kenya.
“GOtv Kenya has been and continues to air the content of the above mentioned four stations, amongst others, pursuant to a ‘must carry’ obligation imposed by Regulation 14 (2) (b) of the Kenya Information and Communications (Broadcasting) Regulations 2009, whose objective is to ensure that the public has access to information “ statement state.
GOtv offers 11 local TV channels and more than 70 additional channels including pay TV and Free to Air Channels on DVB-T2 technology.
It has been authorized by the Communications Authority of Kenya; it was the first provider in Kenya to launch DVB-T2 technology over three years ago.
The case will be heard on February 2.