NAIROBI, Kenya — Survivors of the 1998 Nairobi bomb blast and families of those killed have suffered a major legal setback after the High Court dismissed a petition seeking compensation from the government, ruling that the case lacked merit and failed to meet the required legal threshold.
In a decision that reopens painful memories more than 25 years after one of Kenya’s deadliest terror attacks, the court found that the petitioners did not provide credible evidence to show the State had prior knowledge of the bombing or intelligence that could have prevented it.
High Court Judge Lawrence Mugambi ruled that while the suffering of the victims was undeniable, sympathy alone could not substitute for admissible and verifiable evidence.
The court held that it could not be established, based on the material presented, that the government was aware of the impending attack or failed to act on actionable intelligence.
The petitioners, many of whom continue to live with permanent injuries, trauma and economic hardship, had argued that the State failed in its constitutional duty to protect citizens.
They also told the court that decades after the August 7, 1998 bombing, they had received little meaningful support despite the lifelong physical and psychological impact of the attack.
However, the judge noted that several reports relied upon by the victims were legally weak, as their authors did not appear in court to testify. As a result, the documents were deemed hearsay and inadmissible.
Justice Mugambi further observed that there was no evidence showing the United States government had blamed Kenya for failing to prevent the bombing, a key element in the petitioners’ argument.
The court stressed that the burden of proof lay with the victims to demonstrate that actionable intelligence existed and that the State failed to act despite being aware of it — a standard the petition failed to meet.
The dismissal has left survivors and bereaved families grappling with renewed disappointment, long after the bombing claimed hundreds of lives and altered countless others forever.
For many, the ruling reinforced a lingering sense of abandonment, as their quest for justice, recognition and closure remains unresolved more than two decades later.
Kituo cha Sheria, which represented the victims, expressed disappointment with the judgment and announced plans to appeal the decision at a higher court.
