Nuru Okanga Acquitted: Court Finds Insufficient Evidence in Threats Case

A Nairobi court has acquitted political activist Nuru Okanga who had been charged with publishing false, defamatory and threatening information on social media for lack of sufficient evidence. In a ruling delivered this morning before Magistrate Rose Ndobi , the court held that the prosecution did not sufficiently link Okanga to the alleged video clip that formed the basis of the charges. Okanga had been accused of posting a video on social media platforms, including TikTok, allegedly containing remarks deemed threatening to president Ruto. The prosecution claimed the video urged the then Deputy President to use his past experience as a District Commissioner to shoot the President. However, the court found glaring gaps in the prosecution’s evidence. During the hearing the investigating officer told the court that he was not an expert capable of determining whether the video was authentic or AI-generated. He further admitted that he relied on a report from the Communications Authority of Kenya (CAK) to proceed with the charges and did not personally play or analyse the video in court. The officer also acknowledged that Okanga was a known political activist but could not conclusively determine whether the video amounted to political opinion protected under the law. A digital analyst who testified in the case admitted that the video was not extracted from the accused person’s devices and conceded that the analytical tools used had emerging errors, raising questions about reliability. In it’s ruling the court noted that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused authored or uploaded the video, emphasizing that no evidence had been established between Okanga and the alleged content. A key prosecution witness admitted that he could not authenticate the video as originating from the accused. Additionally, the prosecution did not demonstrate compliance with the law on handling electronic evidence, including failure to show that telecommunication devices were tendered or properly extracted as required. The court further found that the chain of custody and extraction process were not adequately demonstrated, contrary to Section 106 of the Evidence Act. On whether there was a case to answer, the court ruled that the prosecution had failed to meet the threshold. “This court finds that the prosecution has not demonstrated a prima facie case against the accused person in all three counts,” the magistrate ruled. Consequently, the court acquitted Nuru Okanga of all charges under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code, holding that he had no case to answer. Nuru was been represented by lawyer Babu Owino.