The pursuit of justice and accountability in law enforcement is a cornerstone of any functional society, and in Kenya, recent events have placed this pursuit squarely under the public spotlight. In a series of startling revelations at the Milimani Magistrate’s Court this past Wednesday, three officers from the Nairobi Central Police Station openly acknowledged widespread irregularities within the very document meant to ensure strict control: the Firearms Movement Register. This admission has sent ripples through the system, demanding urgent answers about the chain of custody for crucial police weaponry.
Police Constables Geoffrey Mbae Murangiri, Simon Waweru, and Corporal Martin Githinji each presented damning testimony, painting a picture of systemic disarray. They revealed that names had been illicitly removed using correction fluid, service numbers altered, and, most alarmingly, weapons signed out on behalf of officers who had never physically collected them. These are not minor clerical errors; they represent significant breaches in the security and accountability protocols vital for public safety.
The individual accounts further highlighted the depth of the problem. Constable Murangiri, for instance, informed Principal Magistrate Geoffrey Onsarigo that despite the register recording him as having received rubber-bullet rounds on June 20, 2024, he was, in fact, only issued a tear-gas launcher. Similarly, Constable Waweru testified that his service number was inexplicably listed next to a Jericho pistol entry dated June 19, 2024, a firearm he emphatically stated he neither collected nor returned.
Corporal Githinji’s testimony was equally concerning. He admitted to signing out the same pistol twice and pointed out a glaring mismatch in service numbers within the register itself – 730997 in one entry versus 220997 in another. While Githinji attributed these discrepancies to likely errors by the officer in charge of the armoury, the sheer volume and nature of these irregularities suggest a deeper systemic issue than simple mistakes.
Perhaps even more alarming than the record-keeping failures was Corporal Githinji’s additional revelation: none of the officers deployed during the recent protests had received formal training in the use of either rubber bullets or live ammunition. This admission raises critical questions about the preparedness and operational guidelines governing police responses in public order situations, directly impacting civilian safety.
These profound revelations unfold amidst weeks of intense scrutiny surrounding the fatal shooting of 29-year-old Rex Masai during the widespread protests against the Finance Bill 2024. The court’s determined focus remains squarely on establishing the precise chain of custody for firearms used during these events, with accountability being the ultimate goal. The integrity of the Firearms Movement Register is paramount to understanding who bore which weapon and under what authority.
