NAKURU, Kenya — The prosecution sought to detain several student suspects for 30 days following the devastating Utumishi Girls school fire. The arson incident has sparked intense public fury and forced the indefinite closure of the institution.
State prosecutors argued that releasing the minors would heavily compromise the ongoing investigation. They explained that detectives face the daunting task of tracking down vital student witnesses who scattered across Kenya immediately after the school was shuttered.
Presenting their case for continued detention, the prosecution submitted:
“The school has since been closed indefinitely and students released to their parents. Potential key witnesses in the matter are located in different parts of the country, and investigators need time to get them and record their statements,” the prosecution submitted.
The State also raised serious concerns regarding the personal safety of the suspects themselves. According to investigators, public hostility has intensified following the online leak of surveillance footage from the night of the fire.
Fearing vigilante justice or retaliation, the State argued:
“The incident has elicited public outrage, thus placing the safety and lives of the respondents in danger if they are released on bail or bond,” the State argued.
“The safety and security of the respondents is key, especially after the release of the CCTV footage,” the prosecution added.
To mitigate these risks and secure evidence, the State asked the court to hold the minors at the Nakuru Children’s Remand Home for the next month, stating, “We also believe it is in the interest of justice to grant the orders we have sought,” the prosecution stated.
Lawyers representing the fire victims strongly backed the detention petition, urging the court to weigh the immense gravity of the crime against the push for bail.
“We are in support of the application. In considering this application and based on the Victim Protection Act, we urge the court to take into account the magnitude and nature of the offence as well as the public outcry,” the victims’ lawyer told the court.
However, the defence team launched a fierce counter-offensive, accusing the state of trying to bypass due process by punishing the minors without formal charges. The defence countered:
“We are opposed to the application. They are looking for pre-trial detention without any charges preferred against the minors,” the defence stated. “There are no compelling reasons as to why the minors should be detained,” the defence submitted.
Defence counsel Kipkoech Ngetich strongly dismissed the prosecution’s claim that the students pose a threat to the integrity of the case, questioning how children could possibly derail a state-backed investigation. Ngetich told the court:
“Can the children interfere with government agencies involved in the probe? No, that is not possible,” Ngetich told the court.
The court is expected to rule on the detention application after reviewing submissions from both sides.
