David Mokaya Acquittal: Moi University Student Demands KSh200M Over Alleged Rights Violation
A 24-year-old finance student from Moi University is demanding KSh 200 million in compensation after being acquitted of publishing alleged “fake news” about President William Ruto.
David Mokaya was cleared on Thursday by the Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi in a case that has now sparked a heated debate over digital rights, privacy, and police conduct in Kenya.
Trial magistrate Carolyne Mugo ruled that the prosecution failed to provide direct evidence linking Mokaya to the social media post in question. In a strong rebuke, the court found that police had improperly handled evidence and acted outside the law.
The case is now shaping up to become a potential landmark constitutional battle over privacy rights in the digital age.
Court Finds No Evidence Linking Mokaya
The legal battle began on 13 November 2024 when Mokaya was accused of sharing an image on social media depicting a funeral procession for the President at Lee Funeral Home.
The image allegedly showed a casket draped in the Kenyan flag and escorted by military officers — a post authorities described as false and offensive.
However, during the trial, the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between Mokaya and the disputed post. The court heard that:
- Mokaya’s social media account was primarily used for marketing.
- The account credentials were shared with three other individuals.
- Those individuals were never called as witnesses.
- Mokaya was in Eldoret at the time of arrest, despite the alleged offence occurring in Nairobi.
Magistrate Carolyne Mugo concluded that the case was built on gaps and assumptions rather than solid proof.
Police Accused of Illegally Obtaining Data
In a particularly damning observation, the court criticized investigators for obtaining data from Safaricom without a court order.
The magistrate noted that accessing private data without judicial authorisation violated due process.
Mokaya’s lawyer, Danstan Omari, has now issued a 48-hour demand notice to state authorities, arguing that his client’s constitutional rights were violated.
“They gave information, very private information, without a court order. This now goes to the violation of the fundamental human rights of Mokaya,” Omari stated.
He further alleged that Mokaya’s GPS location was tracked without a warrant, amounting to a breach of privacy protections under Article 31 of the Constitution.
Privacy and Constitutional Rights at the Center
Article 31 of Kenya’s Constitution guarantees every person the right to privacy, including protection against:
- Unwarranted searches
- Seizure of personal information
- Disclosure of private communications
Omari argues that Safaricom provided private data because the case involved the Head of State, calling it a violation of inherent dignity.
“So, we are pursuing this thing seriously by Monday, 10:00 a.m. If Safaricom has not accepted… If they have not sent us a check of 200 million shillings, we shall be before the Milimani constitutional court to get justice for David Mokaya,” Omari declared.
The defence team insists this case could become a “test case” for digital rights enforcement in Kenya.
Emotional Toll on the Student
Throughout the proceedings, Mokaya appeared visibly distressed. He was seen shedding tears during the delivery of judgment.
According to his lawyer, the ordeal has left him deeply traumatised.
“This student can’t even talk due to mental trauma and shock that gripped him since he was charged,” Omari said.
The case has reignited concerns about the mental health impact of criminal prosecutions involving online speech, especially among young Kenyans.
A Test Case for Digital Rights in Kenya
Legal analysts suggest the David Mokaya acquittal could influence future cases involving:
- Alleged fake news offences
- Digital surveillance
- Data privacy protections
- Seizure of electronic devices
The defence argues that law enforcement agencies should not seize mobile phones or laptops, or access telecom data, without prior judicial approval.
“Your location is private. Your location cannot be disclosed to anybody without your consent,” Omari emphasized.
The magistrate also reminded police of their duty to act within the law, even when cases involve high-ranking political figures. She stressed that matters touching on the presidency must be handled professionally and without political pressure.
Why the KSh200 Million Demand Matters
The KSh200 million compensation demand is significant for several reasons:
- It signals a possible constitutional petition over privacy violations.
- It places corporate data-sharing practices under scrutiny.
- It could redefine how telecom companies respond to law enforcement requests.
- It may establish new legal standards for digital investigations in Kenya.
If filed in the constitutional court, the case could set binding precedents on data protection and surveillance practices.
Broader Implications for Social Media Users
Kenya has witnessed an increase in prosecutions related to alleged misinformation online. However, the Mokaya acquittal underscores the importance of:
- Proper evidence gathering
- Judicial oversight in data requests
- Protection of digital rights
For social media users, the ruling serves as both reassurance and caution — reassurance that courts can uphold constitutional rights, and caution that digital footprints are increasingly monitored.
What Happens Next?
If Safaricom and state authorities do not respond to the demand notice within 48 hours, Mokaya’s legal team says it will file a constitutional petition at the Milimani Constitutional Court.
The outcome could shape the future of digital privacy enforcement in Kenya.
For now, David Mokaya walks free — but the legal and constitutional battle may just be beginning.