More Questions Than Answers: DIG Lagat’s Exit Sparks Legal And Moral Debate Amid Ojwang Murder Probe

The decision by Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police Eliud Lagat to “step aside” from his role has ignited a national conversation over justice, police accountability, and the legal intricacies of public office suspension, especially in the wake of the shocking death of teacher and blogger Albert Ojwang while in police custody. 

Lagat made the surprise announcement on Monday, June 16, in a public statement aimed at upholding the integrity of investigations into Ojwang’s murder. The high-ranking officer, who took over the DIG role in 2024, said his decision was personal and moral, allowing the Independent Police Oversight Authority (IPOA) to carry out an unimpeded investigation. 

“In the good and conscious thought of my role and responsibilities… I have today opted to step aside… pending completion of investigations,” Lagat wrote. 

He expressed condolences to the family of Ojwang and committed to offering full support during the probe. 

While Lagat’s move has been praised by some as a responsible and ethical gesture, legal experts and civil society are raising critical questions: Is there any legal basis for a Deputy Inspector General to simply “step aside”? 

According to the National Police Service Commission (Discipline) Regulations, a DIG can only be interdicted, suspended, or removed by due process, either through the President or the Inspector General, depending on the grounds. The Public Officers Ethics Act outlines three conditions under which a DIG can vacate office: resignation in writing, suspension pending disciplinary procedures, or removal due to misconduct. 

“In law, stepping aside has no legal weight. The only meaningful and tangible action he should have taken is to resign,” said Advocate Joshua Malidzo. 

He added that this strategy is often used by public officials as a buffer zone, allowing them to avoid active duty while waiting for investigations to clear them without permanent consequences. 

The decision comes amid growing pressure from the public, lawmakers, and human rights organizations, all demanding transparency and accountability. Protests have erupted across major towns as anger grows over the circumstances of Ojwang’s death, believed to have involved torture and abuse inside Nairobi’s Central Police Station. 

In a powerful statement earlier on Monday, former Chief Justice David Maraga called for the immediate arrest of not just Lagat, but also the Inspector General Douglas Kanja and DCI boss Mohammed Amin. Maraga issued a June 25 deadline for action, warning that civil prosecution would commence if the government failed to act. 

Eliud Lagat’s career trajectory paints the picture of a seasoned officer who once held elite security roles. Before becoming DIG, he served as Commandant of the General Service Unit (GSU), a critical arm of Kenya’s internal security apparatus. He had also served as Director of Reforms at DCI and Head of the Bomb and Hazardous Materials Unit. 

These roles put Lagat squarely at the heart of Kenya’s security and reform agendas. His current predicament has therefore sent shockwaves across the security sector, with some questioning whether this case could mark the beginning of a deeper reckoning within the police leadership. 

For now, Lagat remains a Deputy Inspector General in title, but his duties are being temporarily handled by his deputy. Whether he will return to full service or face formal disciplinary action hinges on the outcome of the IPOA investigation. 

Still, critics remain skeptical. 

“The letter gives civil society groups grounds to hold him accountable… it’s almost an admission that he’s a person of interest,” Malidzo observed. 

As the country waits with bated breath, the Ojwang case continues to expose uncomfortable truths about Kenya’s criminal justice system, and the real cost of silence.