Katiba Institute has filed a case against the Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja and the Attorney General for contempt of court orders by erecting police roadblocks and razor-wire barricades during Gen Z’s anniversary protests.

According to the Katiba Institute, Kanja went against conservatory orders issued on July 9, 2025, that restrained IG and any officer subordinate to him from mounting barricades or police roadblocks without first issuing a timely advisory.

Through the application filed on Friday, June 26, 2026, by advocate Joshua Malidzo Nyawa, Katiba avers that the IG went against the standing orders by erecting roadblocks on roads leading to the Central Business District (CBD) on June 25, 2026.

“Yesterday, Thursday, June 25, 2026, the 1st respondent’s (IG Kanja) actions signalled a culture of impunity and a betrayal of the very survival of our democracy,” Katiba states in the application.

“Despite the existence of the order, the 1st Respondent yesterday mounted barricades and blocked access to the Nairobi Central Business District, without issuing any prior advisory or notice, in blatant and deliberate disobedience of the orders of this court,” part of the application reads. 

The petitioner wants IG Kanja to be cited for contempt or be found to be in contempt of court for disobeying the orders made on July 9, 2025, and October 2, 2025.

Further, they are seeking to have Kanja punished appropriately for disobeying court orders issued in 2025 by Justice Lawrence Mugambi.

Katiba cites that IG Kanja’s continued defiance of the court’s orders undermines the authority and dignity of the court, erodes the rule of law, and threatens the constitutional principle that court orders are binding on all persons and state organs unless and until they are varied or set aside. 

Further, the petitioner states that the conduct of blocking roads by the IG and the AG constitutes a direct and deliberate violation of the orders of the court and warrants immediate judicial intervention. 

“The contemnors’ conduct constitutes a serious interference with the administration of justice and demonstrates a blatant disregard for the rule of law. The grant of this motion will not prejudice any party but will instead reinforce the authority of the court and the integrity of the judicial process,” part of the application reads.