NAIROBI, Kenya — The High Court has extended orders stopping the development of regulations on the removal of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), as a fresh application seeks to have officials from the Public Service Commission (PSC) cited for contempt of court.
The court certified the matter as urgent and directed that the application be served on all respondents within three days. Those named have been given seven days to file responses, while the applicant may file a further affidavit within seven days after receiving replies.
The case will be mentioned on April 9, 2026, for further directions.
“For avoidance of doubt, the orders issued on 12th March, 2026, remain in force,” the court ruled.
The orders stem from an earlier decision by Justice Joe Omido, who halted the formulation, validation, and adoption of the Draft Public Service Commission (Removal of the Director of Public Prosecutions) Regulations, 2026.
The ruling also barred any stakeholder engagement or validation forums linked to the process.
However, petitioner Jane Onyango now accuses senior PSC officials of defying those orders by proceeding with an online validation forum on March 23, describing the move as willful disobedience of a lawful court directive.
Court documents show that the petitioner served the orders and supporting documents on March 16, both physically and via email, and later filed an affidavit confirming service. Despite this, the PSC allegedly proceeded with the forum, a key step in advancing the disputed regulations.
Those named in the contempt application include several commissioners and the Commission’s Chief Executive Officer, Paul Famba, alongside other senior officials.
Through lawyer Festus Onyango, the petitioner is seeking orders compelling the officials to appear in court and show cause why they should not be punished for contempt.
The application also seeks to nullify any resolutions or outcomes arising from the March 23 forum, arguing they are void and without legal effect.
Additionally, the petitioner wants the court to commit the officials to civil jail for up to six months if found guilty and to have them personally bear the costs of the proceedings.
The case raises significant constitutional and governance questions regarding compliance with court orders and the limits of administrative authority.
It also touches on the legal framework governing the removal of the DPP, an independent office established under Article 157 of the Constitution, which guarantees prosecutorial independence.
The court is expected to give further directions when the matter comes up next month.
