Naivasha Member of Parliament Jayne Kihara is set to face trial on charges of offensive conduct, a notable blow to her efforts to dismiss the criminal case against her. The High Court has dismissed her application, ruling that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) acted within the law in instituting the charges, paving the way for the embattled lawmaker to take a plea.
Magistrate Benmark Ekhubi, presiding at the Milimani Law Courts, ordered Kihara to take a plea on charges linked to alleged incitement remarks. Kihara is accused of uttering offensive words during a public gathering in Nairobi on July 8, 2025, with the intent to provoke violence. The court held that there was sufficient basis for the case to proceed and declined to interfere with the prosecutorial powers of the ODPP.
Chaos briefly erupted in the courtroom as some of Kihara’s supporters chanted “wantam” slogans, expressing dissatisfaction with the legal process. Outside the court, Kihara maintained her innocence, stating, “This is a political prosecution. I do not know who I incited, as I was addressing the press. I was also part of the convoy that was targeted on Sunday. If talking on important issues is what is termed incitement, then I have no alternative but to continue speaking on such issues”.
Kihara’s legal team, led by Senior Counsel Kalonzo Musyoka and advocate Ndegwa Njiru, vehemently objected to the plea-taking, requesting 14 days to file a constitutional petition challenging the charges. They argued that the charges were politically motivated, vague, and violated Kihara’s constitutional right to freedom of expression under Article 33.
Musyoka stated that the charge sheet “does not disclose any offence” and highlighted that other MPs have made more controversial statements without facing similar charges. Njiru further questioned the relevance and legality of Section 94(1) of the Penal Code, under which Kihara is charged, noting it was enacted in 1930 and should be reviewed in light of the current constitutional framework.
The prosecution, led by Victory Owiti, countered that freedom of expression is not absolute and does not protect hate speech or incitement to violence. Owiti maintained that the charge sheet was properly constituted and that the law remains enforceable unless declared unconstitutional or repealed by Parliament.
Kihara was initially summoned by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) over allegations of undermining the authority of a public officer under Section 132 of the Penal Code. After failing to honor the summons, detectives raided her home and apprehended her, an event she livestreamed.
She was later released on a personal bond of Ksh50,000. Following her release, Kihara publicly warned President William Ruto about his continued friendship with Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah, stating, “I would like to tell President Ruto, with Ichung’wah as your friend, you don’t need another enemy. With Ichung’wah around you, you need no other enemy because he is the one wronging Kenyans. He abused me, and told me to behave my age,” Kihara said.
