REPUBLIC OF KENYA High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts) Petition 188 of 2012 AGNES NEMAKONDE GALAWU ............................................PETITIONER AND THE HON. MINISTER OF STATE FOR IMMIGRATION AND REGISTRATION OF PERSONS .....................................1ST RESPONDENT THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL.................................2ND RESPONDENT KITUO CHA SHERIA......................................................3RD RESPONDENT RULING 1. The nationality and status of the petitioner is in doubt and it is the subject of this petition. The petitioner also challenges the nature of holding facilities at the Lang’ata Women’s Prison. While the matter was pending, the UNHCR agreed to facilitate her residence at their facilities. Unfortunately, due to her conduct, she compromised the UNHCR’s ability to discharge its functions for the benefit of persons in similar need. In fact her appearance, in court was pursuant to a warrant of arrest. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has asked the court not to return the petitioner to Langata Women’s Prison on account of the challenge made to those facilities in the petition. He also suggests that she should be free and the court should impose an order for her to report to the Police Station periodically. 3. I am sympathetic to the petitioner’s plight but the proper holding place known is the Lang’ata Women’s Prison where she was being held prior to the intervention of the UNHCR. Pending judgment she shall be held in that facility. 4. The judgment in this matter shall be read on 5th December 2012 at 2.30 pm. DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 6th day of November 2012 D.S. MAJANJA JUDGE COURT – Ruling read and delivered in open court. D.S. MAJANJA JUDGE
Original judgment
Agnes Nemakonde Galawu v The Hon. Minister of State For Immigration and Registration of Persons & 2 others
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.