High Court imposes strict reporting rules in Utumishi Girls murder trial

Eight of nine minors from Utumishi Girls in Gilgil at the Naivasha Law Courts. [Antony Gitonga, Standard]

The High Court has imposed strict reporting restrictions in the trial of eight Utumishi Girls Academy students accused of the deaths of 16 fellow students in a dormitory fire, barring the publication of any information that could identify the child suspects.

In detailed case management and media reporting directions, Justice Diana Kavedza of Kibera High Court ordered that the identities of the eight minors, their parents, guardians, siblings and immediate family members remain confidential throughout the proceedings.

The judge prohibited the publication or broadcast of the students' names, initials, photographs, videos, voice recordings, school admission numbers, residential addresses, physical descriptions or any other information capable of directly or indirectly identifying them.

The court also ordered that the identities of protected child witnesses remain confidential and barred the publication of any information capable of revealing their identities, whether on its own or when combined with other publicly available information.

Justice Kavedza directed that the eight accused children shall be identified throughout the proceedings only by anonymised codes assigned by the Deputy Registrar.

The register linking the codes to the identities of the minors will remain confidential and accessible only to the court, the Deputy Registrar, the parties and any other person specifically authorised by the court.

The judge further ordered that all social inquiry reports, probation reports, psychiatric and psychological assessments, medical reports and any other documents containing personal or welfare information relating to the minors be treated as confidential and excluded from public access.

While the proceedings will remain open to the public, accredited journalists will only be allowed to report fairly and accurately on what transpires in open court without publishing material capable of identifying the child suspects or protected witnesses.

Justice Kavedza also prohibited photography, filming, audio recording, video recording, live-streaming and broadcasting from inside the courtroom or its immediate precincts unless prior written permission is granted by the court.

She directed that every accredited media representative must sign a written undertaking to comply with the reporting guidelines before being allowed access to the proceedings.

The judge warned that any breach of the reporting directions would amount to serious interference with the administration of justice and could attract contempt of court proceedings, revocation of media accreditation, exclusion from future hearings, removal of offending publications or broadcasts and any other sanctions the court may deem appropriate.

The restrictions apply not only to print and broadcast media but also to digital publications, online news platforms, blogs, vloggers, social media users and every other form of electronic or digital communication.

On the conduct of the trial, Justice Kavedza ordered that every accused child must be represented by an advocate throughout the proceedings and that no substantive hearing shall take place in the absence of legal representation.

Where necessary, the court directed the Legal Aid Service to facilitate the appointment of counsel.

The court further directed that a parent, guardian or designated children's officer must be present during every hearing involving each child.

Children's officers will monitor the welfare of the minors throughout the trial and remain available to assist the court whenever required.

Justice Kavedza ordered that the students remain at the designated children's remand home unless the court orders otherwise, reiterating that detention of children must remain a measure of last resort and only for the shortest period necessary.

The officer in charge of the remand home was directed to file confidential welfare reports before every substantive hearing detailing the physical and psychological well-being of each child, continued access to education, medical care, accommodation and any other welfare concerns requiring the court's attention.

The court also directed that no accused child shall proceed to trial until age has been formally determined, where necessary and social inquiry reports filed for each child to guide future decisions on welfare, placement and case management.

Justice Kavedza ordered that hearing dates be strictly observed, adjournments granted only for good cause, and all interlocutory applications determined before the commencement of the trial.

She further directed the parties to comply with timelines for filing witness statements, expert reports, documentary evidence and written submissions.

The Director of Public Prosecutions was directed to ensure timely disclosure of all prosecution material to the defence in accordance with Article 50 of the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Code to guarantee the children's right to a fair trial.

The judge said the directions are intended to protect the constitutional rights of children in conflict with the law, safeguard victims and vulnerable witnesses, preserve the integrity of the judicial process and ensure that justice is administered fairly, transparently and without prejudice.

She emphasised that despite the intense public interest surrounding the case, justice cannot be determined through public outrage, social media commentary or trial by public opinion, but only through evidence presented before the court and the applicable law.

The directions will remain in force throughout the proceedings unless reviewed or varied by the court.