The court has ordered the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) to re-investigate the case of the disappearance of Lake Nakuru fisherman Brian Odhiambo.

Nakuru Principal Magistrate Vincent Adet ordered the security agency to extend the investigations into areas pointed out by the Directorate of Public Prosecution and review the loopholes indicated.

Vocal Africa and Odhiambo’s wife, Alvy Aoko Okello sued the DPP, Inspector of Police (IG), DCI, and the person in charge of Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) Lake Nakuru National Park.

Odhiambo went missing on January 18, 2025, allegedly in the hands of KWS warders stationed at Lake Nakuru National Park, who had arrested him for allegedly trespassing.

The court noted that the DPP should incorporate Okello and Vocal Africa in their investigation, which should be completed within 30 days.

“Upon completion of the investigation, DCI and IG shall forward the investigative file to the DPP within the stipulated time,” Adet directed.

This is after the DPP informed the court that they had received the file from DCI but redirected the file to them for further investigation

The court observed that upon the receipt of the file, the DPP is obligated to review and evaluate the findings and formulate recommendations within 21 days and act accordingly.

The magistrate agreed with Vocal Africa and Okello that anyone was permitted to approach the court for enforcement of human rights that are at risk of violation.

The State had argued that there was a statutory procedure on how an inquest should be conducted.

Odhiambo, a member of the fisherfolk community, is said to have disappeared on January 18, allegedly after he was forcibly taken into custody by KWS wardens who were on an operation to weed out illegal fishing and other crimes at the park.

“Despite a habeas corpus application filed in the High Court of Nakuru, his whereabouts remain unknown, raising concerns of State involvement or cover-up,” the court observed.

The inquest application, the court noted, addresses different legal questions and facts related to the circumstances of suspicious disappearance or death, not the legality of custody.

Adet concurred with the applicants that Sections 386(1)(d) and 387 typically assign the magistrate the responsibility to conduct an inquest to determine the cause of death in cases where someone is missing and presumed dead. Vocal Africa and Okello had said an inquest investigation was a judicial function preserved for courts, not the DPP.

The court observed that the State should keep the applicants informed of the progress of the investigations.

“The Applicant shall be engaged by the Respondents to provide any necessary information, evidence materials, and or witnesses pertinent to the investigations,” the court observed.