Lawyer Willis Otieno has challenged a magistrate’s order that activist Mwabili Mwagodi report daily to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) at 7:00 AM, saying it raises constitutional, economic and proportionality issues.
Otieno’s critique follows emerging details of Mwagodi’s recent arrest and the legal conditions now facing the rights defender.
In a post on X, Otieno described the directive as an excessive curtailment of Mwagodi’s freedom of movement and economic liberties prior to conviction.
“Such a directive functionally curtails the subject’s freedom of movement and economic agency without the threshold of conviction,” he wrote, questioning whether the requirement amounted to “anticipatory punishment rather than facilitative investigation.”
The concerns build on the circumstances of Mwagodi’s arrest. The activist was detained on 15 February 2026 at the Lunga Lunga border crossing in Kwale County after immigration officials prevented him from leaving Kenya, citing a purported Red Notice linked to his passport by the DCI.
He was travelling to Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to finalise personal affairs and follow up with a former employer when he was stopped and subsequently held by police.
Mwagodi spent the night in custody at the Lunga Lunga Police Station before being transported first to the Kenya Ports Authority Police Station in Mombasa and later to Nairobi for arraignment.
He was brought before a magistrate’s court in Milimani on 18 February, where he was released on a Sh500,000 personal bond pending further investigations into alleged false publication of information on his X social media account.
Otieno also raised issue with the investigative process, particularly the search and seizure of Mwagodi’s mobile phone.
He stressed that the evidentiary threshold for digital warrants must be strictly observed given the significant privacy interests implicated by access to personal devices.
The lawyer further highlighted economic harm, asking how Mwagodi is expected to sustain employment and meet contractual obligations if early hours are consumed at the DCI offices — a point he says underscores broader questions about proportionality in State investigations.
Civil society groups have joined the debate, with activists warning that prolonged reporting requirements and unclear legal grounds for detention risk eroding due process protections.
The defence and human rights observers have emphasised the need for transparency around the basis for the Red Notice and clear communication of any formal charges.
The matter is scheduled for mention in court in early March, where further directions on reporting conditions and the progression of investigations will be considered.