Westgate accused denied bail

Four westgate terror suspects in a Nairobi court on December 3, 2013: From left Mr Hussein Hassan Mustafa, Mr Adan Abdikadir Mohhamed Dheq, Mr Liban Abdulah and Mohammed Ahmed Abdi during the mention of the case in which they are charged with carrying out the terrorist attack on September 21. A court overruled their bail request on December 4, 2013 saying the reasons the prosecution gave while objecting to their application overrides their “individual rights and freedom.” PHOTO | PAUL WAWERU

What you need to know:

  • A probe into the mall attack, according to the prosecution, is yet to be completed and has stretched to far flung areas including Kakuma in North Eastern and Uganda and Somalia.

The four men charged over the Westgate Mall terror attack in Nairobi have been denied bail.

A court overruled their bail request Wednesday saying the reasons the prosecution gave while objecting to their application overrides their “individual rights and freedom.”

The prosecution led by State Counsel James Warui had twice asked the court not to grant the suspects bond, citing national security issues.

The men may flee as the charges they face are serious, the prosecutor added. He told the court that some of the suspects were refugees and that their true identities were yet to be established.

Chief magistrate Waweru Kiarie was also asked to take judicial notice of the numerous terrorist attacks in the country.

Mr Mohammed Ahmed Abdi, Mr Liban Abdullah, Mr Adnan Ibrahim and Mr Hussein Hassan are accused of carrying out a terrorist attack at Westgate Shopping Mall on September 21 and supporting a terrorist group.

On the fateful day, suspected Al-Shabaab terrorists attacked the shopping mall in an incident which left 67 people dead and 200 others injured.

Kakuma in North Eastern and Uganda and Somalia.

A probe into the mall attack, according to the prosecution, is yet to be completed and has stretched to far flung areas including Kakuma in North Eastern and Uganda and Somalia.

The suspects had argued, through their lawyers, that the offences they are alleged to have committed were “bailable.”

They also said they had a constitutional right to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

They had also contended that they were no flight risk as the prosecution had labelled them and had offered to stay with Kenyan relatives.

“I have taken judicial notice that there are numerous attacks in the country whose citizens should go about their business without any fear.

I also have a duty to ensure that the rights of an accused persons are safeguarded as required in the Constitution,” Mr Kiarie said.

However, the magistrate added that where the rights of an individual are perceived to jeopardise the common good, “the public takes priority.”

“The court has also been that the suspect’s true identities were yet to be known,” Mr Kiarie said .

The magistrate said he had deliberately ignored allegations made against the suspects in an affidavit the investigating officer Kennedy Musyoki swore as some of them may need to be supported by evidence.

He said the suspects have a right to apply for bond at a different court. The case will be mentioned on December 18 and heard the following day.