NAIROBI — The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) has once again turned its social media pages into a digital pillory, sparking a fierce rebuke from the legal fraternity this morning. Following the high-profile arrest of 26 suspects linked to a passport and ID fraud syndicate, the DCI released a collage of mugshots on X (formerly Twitter), a move lawyers are calling a flagrant violation of the Constitution and a direct contempt of court.

The online parade, intended to showcase the agency’s efficiency in cracking down on the “cartels” plaguing the Department of Immigration, has instead reopened old wounds regarding the rights of the accused. Legal experts argue that by circulating these images before any formal charges are read in a court of law, the DCI is effectively acting as judge, jury, and executioner in the court of public opinion.

The ‘Digital Walk of Shame’

The controversy centers on a series of posts detailing the dismantling of a sophisticated criminal network involving civil servants and middlemen. While the public cheered the crackdown on corruption—a vice that costs the Kenyan economy billions annually—lawyers were quick to point out the legal foul.

“The DCI must apologize for detaining suspects and humiliating them by circulating their photos online without evidence,” a representative for the aggrieved lawyers stated today. The core argument is simple: under Article 50 of the Constitution, every Kenyan is presumed innocent until proven guilty. When the state brands them as criminals to millions of followers online, that presumption is eroded, potentially prejudicing their future trial.

• The Incident: Photos of 26 suspects (including civil servants) posted on DCI social handles.
• The Charge: Alleged involvement in illegal issuance of IDs and Passports.
• The Grievance: Violation of privacy and presumption of innocence (Article 50).

A History of Defiance

This is not a new battleground. In December 2019, High Court Justice Wilfrida Okwany issued a conservatory order explicitly barring the DCI and the Inspector General of Police from posting booking photographs of suspects on social media. Justice Okwany ruled that the practice was “unconstitutional” and infringed on the suspects' right to privacy.

At the time, the DCI defended the practice as “international best practice” for transparency and public safety. However, the resurgence of these posts suggests a calculated return to ‘naming and shaming’ as a PR strategy. For the average Kenyan, the stakes are high. If a citizen is wrongfully arrested and their face is plastered across the internet, the reputational damage is permanent, even if a court later acquits them.

The Human Cost

Beyond the legal jargon, the impact is personal. In an era where “the internet never forgets,” a digital footprint linking an individual to a crime can make it impossible to secure employment or loans in the future. With the Data Protection Act now fully operational in Kenya, the DCI could face not just public backlash, but significant legal penalties for mishandling personal data.

As the 26 suspects prepare to face actual charges in court, the DCI finds itself in the dock of public scrutiny. The question remains: Can Kenya fight crime effectively without sacrificing the civil liberties that define its democracy?