Kenya, July 24 -- The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has moved to withdraw from representing blogger and activist Ndiangui Kinyagia in his alleged abduction case, citing contradictory facts provided by Kinyagia and his family that threaten the organization's credibility.

During a High Court session before Justice Chacha Mwita, LSK President Faith Odhiambo highlighted inconsistencies in a July 3, 2025, affidavit filed by Kinyagia's cousin, Lilian Wanjiku Gitonga, which claimed Kinyagia was safe and had contacted her during his 13-day disappearance, contradicting earlier claims of an enforced abduction.

The LSK's decision, announced on July 24, has sparked heated debate, with citizens amplifying the controversy.

Kinyagia's case began on June 21, 2025, when neighbours reported a raid on his Kinoo, Kiambu County home by suspected Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) officers in six to ten unmarked Subaru vehicles.

The LSK, alongside Senior Counsel Martha Karua, filed a habeas corpus petition, alleging an enforced disappearance linked to Kinyagia's role in publicising the June 25 Gen Z protest schedule.

The petition demanded that Inspector General Douglas Kanja and DCI Director Mohamed Amin produce Kinyagia, dead or alive.

However, Kinyagia resurfaced on July 3 at Milimani Law Courts, claiming he had gone into hiding out of fear, prompting accusations of staging his disappearance.

The conflicting affidavit, filed by Gitonga, stated Kinyagia called her during his absence, assuring her safety, a narrative that clashed with the LSK's initial abduction claims. Lawyer Kibe Mungai, representing Kinyagia's family, distanced himself from the final affidavit, noting it differed from his draft, further muddying the case.

Justice Mwita, observing Mungai's discomfort, adjourned hearings to July 24 and September 16, 2025, to clarify legal representation and cross-examine Kinyagia, Gitonga, and his mother, Margaret Rukwaro.

The LSK's withdrawal request, driven by these discrepancies, reflects concerns over professional integrity, as Odhiambo stated, "We cannot proceed with contradictory accounts undermining our position."

Public reaction has been polarised. Activist Boniface Mwangi, in a July 3 X post, accused Kinyagia and his family of misleading the nation, calling the incident "criminal" and criticising their manipulation of public sympathy.

Others echoed this, lamenting, "We cried in despair, but Ndiangui was safe, while the country mourned a lie."

Conversely, supporters argue Kinyagia's fear of DCI pursuit, linked to his protest-related posts, justified his actions. The DCI, denying custody, summoned Kinyagia for questioning over a viral mock protest invitation, while maintaining the raid was lawful, seizing laptops and documents.

The LSK's move has broader implications for Kenya's civic space, with Amnesty Kenya and KNCHR condemning a pattern of abductions targeting activists.

The case has fueled debates about trust in activist campaigns, with lawyer Phannie Kwega warning that such incidents could discredit future habeas corpus petitions.

Kinyagia's role in the Saba Saba protests and his "Daguin Dd" X account, known for governance critiques, amplified his visibility, making his disappearance a national flashpoint.

Critics question the DCI's transparency, citing their failure to produce Kinyagia during initial court orders, while supporters of the LSK's withdrawal argue it preserves the organisation's credibility amid Kenya's 7.5% GDP budget deficit and rising public distrust.

Kinyagia, now represented by Kibe Mungai and Wahome Thuku, appeared visibly shaken in court, requesting protection from arrest.

The case's adjournment leaves unresolved questions about the raid's legality and Kinyagia's motives, with the LSK's exit signalling a shift in legal strategy.

Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Bana Kenya.