Leonard Kevin Nyamasege, David Ombego, Joyce Onyiego & Erick Ayuka v Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions & Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission
The bottom line
#The High Court struck down a petition filed to stop a criminal case, warning that filing the same case at different court stations is an abuse of process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Petition constitutes an abuse of the process of the Court
Yes - the Petition forms part of a sustained pattern of repeatedly instituting proceedings before different High Court stations challenging the same prosecution for the same relief.
The chronology shows the same litigants filed Nyamira HCCRMISCAPPL E020 of 2026, then Bomet Petitions E002 and E003 of 2026 (transferred as Nyamira HCCHRPET E008 and E009 of 2026), and then the present Petition at Kisumu, all concerning Keroka MCCGCR No. E001 of 2026 and seeking substantially the same conservatory relief. A dissatisfied party must appeal, not file fresh proceedings in a coordinate court.
Whether the right of access to justice protects the filing of parallel petitions
No - Articles 22 and 48 guarantees cannot be invoked to justify repeated substantially similar proceedings before courts of concurrent jurisdiction.
The Court acknowledged the constitutional right to institute proceedings and access to justice but held these guarantees are subject to the principles of finality, judicial comity and orderly administration of justice; the proper remedy against an adverse determination is the appellate process established by law.
Legal principles established
#- The High Court under Article 165 is one Court; its stations and divisions are for administrative convenience and do not permit litigants to shop for favourable forums.
- Constitutional rights of access to justice under Articles 22 and 48 cannot justify repeated institution of substantially similar proceedings before courts of concurrent jurisdiction.
Court orders
#- 1.The Petition dated 18th June 2026 and the Notice of Motion of even date are struck out in their entirety for being an abuse of the process of the Court
- 2.The conservatory orders issued in these proceedings are discharged forthwith
- 3.1st Respondent's costs to be borne by the Petitioners
- 4.The file is closed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 165 of the Constitution (High Court constitutional jurisdiction); inherent jurisdiction preserved under Rule 3(8) of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules, 2013
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Leonard Kevin Nyamasege, David Ombego, Joyce Onyiego & Erick Ayuka v Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions & Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission", Case Analysis (2026). Petition dated 18th June 2026 (High Court at Nyamira). Source:
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.