Court reduces cash bail to Sh30,000 for Saba Saba protesters

The High Court in Thika ordered the release of 42 protestors who were arrested during the Saba Saba protests on July 7, 2025, in Juja, Kiambu County, after finding the bail terms earlier imposed by a magistrate to be unaffordable.

Instead, the court ordered that all 42 applicants, including the 19th applicant who is a minor, be released on a bond of Sh100,000 with one surety or a cash bail of Sh30,000.

“The terms imposed should not be such that it amounts to denial of constitutional right to bail pending trial,” ruled the court.

In the ruling delivered virtually, Lady Justice Florence Muchemi allowed the application for revision of bail terms, which had been filed by the protestors.

The applicants had been held in custody for over a month after being granted bail terms of Sh300,000 with two sureties or a cash bail of Sh100,000, which most could not afford.

“The applicants ought to benefit from the constitutional presumption of innocence until proven guilty,” said Justice Muchemi.

The 42 accused persons, aged between 17 and 30, were jointly charged with four counts including robbery with violence, malicious damage to property and assaulting police officers, charges they all denied.

Their lawyers Abuna Mangu, Babu Owino, Warijira Maina, Noordin Kagae, Pius Onyango, Julius Juma, and James Ong’amo argued that the original bail terms were excessive and unaffordable, failed to consider the applicants’ lack of income, and effectively denied them their constitutional right to “liberty and freedom”.

“The applicants are unemployed with no means of income,” said lawyer James Ong’amo.

“The court failed to consider pre-sentence reports that showed the unaffordability of the high bond terms.”

The defence also alleged that some of those arrested were minors and that several had already been released earlier following age assessments.

The prosecution, through State Counsel Ms. Torosi, opposed the application, maintaining that the offences were serious and that the bond terms imposed were within reason.

She argued that the seriousness of the offences ought to be taken into account in granting bail.

However, Justice Muchemi disagreed, finding that the magistrate’s court did not adequately consider the pre sentence report

“This court take judicial notice of the character and style of operations of law enforcers trying to maintain order which may involve clashes with demonstrators and end up with all sorts of people being swept and locked in by police with view of being arraigned in court,” said Muchemi.

“In this kind of scenario, all sorts of people could fall into the hands of the law enforcers and eventually land in court for the police and the court to separate the wheat and the chaff.”

The court said that pre-sentence reports showed most of the applicants were law-abiding citizens with strong family ties and no prior records, yet those facts had been overlooked when setting bond.

She also emphasized the need to decongest prison facilities, especially where large groups are involved.

“Only 10 out of 42 have to date been released,” she said.

“There is no evidence nor indication of the capacity of their families to comply with bond terms.”