Cop in outburst video off the hook
A police officer who was recently caught on video protesting against being sent to assignments without allowances will not face any disciplinary action after all.
Despite being sent on compulsory leave, Administration Police officer Jane Asimizi will not be dismissed from service as the National Police Service Commission promised to look into her grievances.
NPSC chair Eliud Kinuthia has said that the officer will resume duty after a two-week leave as the commission investigates her grievances.
“The officer has not been fired and will not be fired. She seemed to have been troubled psychologically at the time and that is why she was told to take some time off, maybe two weeks then we will look into her concerns,” Mr Kinuthia said.
The NPSC chair was speaking in Nyeri where the commission has been meeting police officers and civilian employees of the National Police Service.
The Kakamega-based police officer had been caught on camera by a section of local media accusing her seniors of frustrating her by deliberately assigning her duties without allowances. The officer claimed that her bosses were mistreating her and that her grievances had been ignored.
— Lord Abraham Mutai (@ItsMutai) October 18, 2019
Last week, Ms Asimizi was sent on compulsory leave by Inspector General of Police Hillary Mutyambai who also ordered that she undergoes psychiatric evaluation. The top cop termed her rant as unprofessional and unprocedural.
However, the police service commission has said that it will consider a possible transfer for the officer to an area she will be comfortable working.
This comes as the Employment Court ruled that the NPSC cannot initiate disciplinary proceedings against police officers for criminal offences they have already been cleared of by the courts.
Justice Nzioki wa Makau of the Employment Court in Nyeri held that allowing the police employer to subject officers to internal disciplinary process and charge them with offences for which courts have found them not guilty of is a “classic double jeopardy”.
A double trial for the same offence is inconsistent with the constitution, thus unlawful, he ruled.