The High Court in Nyamira was on Thursday urged to urgently review the six-month civil jail sentence imposed on journalist Daniel Nyakundi, alias Evans Nyakundi, on grounds that he was jailed without prior knowledge of the case or court orders.
In an application certified as urgent, prominent city lawyer Danstan Omari, appearing for Nyakundi, told the court that his client was not served with any pleadings or orders relating to the contempt proceedings that led to his incarceration on July 28, 2025.
“The 2nd Defendant was neither aware of the orders issued on April 7, 2025, nor that a case had been instituted against him. He was condemned unheard,” Omari submitted.
Nyakundi, a former senior editor and now independent journalist, is named as the second defendant in Civil Case No. E001 of 2025, filed by Dr. Asenath Maore against Headlink Publishers Limited and himself over undisclosed content-related disputes.
The court had issued injunctive orders on April 7 barring further publication, which were allegedly disobeyed, resulting in Nyakundi’s sentencing for contempt.
However, Omari argued that his client’s fundamental rights under Article 50 of the Constitution, which guarantees a fair hearing, were violated.
“The court’s decision was reached without affording him a right to be heard or even mitigate. He was never served with the contempt application, nor was he issued with a notice to show cause,” Omari said.
Nyakundi is currently serving the sentence in civil jail, which his legal team now wants reviewed and substituted with a reasonable fine.
They are also seeking a production order to have him brought to court in person to address the matter.
In his affidavit, Nyakundi maintains he only learnt of the case and subsequent sentence after he had already been committed to jail.
“I am a law-abiding citizen and had no intention to defy court orders. I was never informed of the same. I am ready to comply moving forward,” he states.
The application, filed under certificate of urgency on August 27, also seeks to have the matter heard on a priority basis, citing violations of Nyakundi’s right to liberty under Article 49 and access to medical care under Article 43.
Omari insisted that no prejudice would be suffered by the Plaintiff if the orders were granted.
“The Plaintiff will not be prejudiced in any way. This is simply a case of a party being punished without due process,” he told the court.
The court is expected to issue directions on the application in due course.
