By Kurian Musa
The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) is facing growing calls to investigate explosive allegations of a planned attack on Kisii Governor Simba Arati following dramatic claims made at a funeral in Kisii County.
Also Read
The controversy erupted after a man identified as Dolvin was invited to address mourners in the Governor’s presence.
In widely circulated videos, he alleged that he had been part of a group that planned to attack Governor Arati. He claimed the mission was abandoned after the group realised he was accompanying the Governor’s wife. He further alleged that money later changed hands to calm the situation and avert the attack.
The allegations have since dominated political debate in the Gusii region and beyond.
But beyond the political drama lies a serious legal question: do the claims disclose the commission of a criminal offence?
The answer depends on what investigators establish.
Under Section 393 of the Penal Code (Cap. 63), conspiracy to commit a felony is a criminal offence. In simple terms, once two or more people agree to commit a felony and begin acting on that agreement, criminal liability may arise even if the intended crime is never completed.
This means that if investigators establish that there was indeed an organised plan to attack the Governor, abandoning the mission at the last minute would not necessarily extinguish criminal responsibility.
The alleged confession itself also presents legal challenges.
Kenya’s Evidence Act (Cap. 80), particularly Section 25A, provides that a confession is generally admissible only when recorded before a magistrate or made before a police officer of the prescribed rank under legally required safeguards.
A statement made at a politically charged funeral gathering does not automatically meet that threshold.
Instead, legal experts say it should be treated as information capable of triggering investigations rather than as proof of guilt.
The DCI would still require independent evidence.
Investigators would be expected to examine phone records, financial transactions, digital communications, witness statements, CCTV footage where available, and any forensic evidence capable of corroborating the allegations.
Without such evidence, prosecutors would struggle to sustain criminal charges.
Kenya has previously witnessed politically motivated violence linked to elections and public gatherings, prompting courts to insist on strong evidentiary standards before criminal liability can be established.
Similar investigations have unfolded elsewhere across Africa.
In South Africa, investigations into the 2021 unrest following the imprisonment of former President Jacob Zuma relied heavily on digital evidence, financial records and telecommunications data to establish alleged criminal coordination rather than public statements alone.
In Uganda, security agencies have on several occasions investigated alleged plots against political leaders by relying on intelligence gathering and forensic evidence before preferring charges.
These cases demonstrate a consistent legal principle across many African jurisdictions: sensational allegations may trigger investigations, but they do not replace evidence.
The Simba Arati incident has also renewed concerns over the growing trend of funeral ceremonies becoming political battlegrounds.
Events intended to honour the dead are increasingly being used for political mobilisation, confrontation and public accusations, often generating more headlines than the funerals themselves.
For investigators, however, the issue is straightforward.
If the allegations are true, they may disclose serious offences under the Penal Code.
If they are false or deliberately staged, that too raises questions about possible offences relating to giving false information, misleading investigators, or abusing public trust.
By the time of publication, neither the DCI nor the National Police Service had publicly announced a formal investigation into the claims.
The responsibility now rests with investigators.
The court of public opinion has already delivered competing verdicts.
The law, however, demands something different: evidence, due process and an impartial investigation.
Only then will Kenyans know whether the funeral exposed a genuine criminal conspiracy or merely another chapter in the country’s increasingly dramatic political theatre.
-About the Author: Kurian Musa is a Kenyan journalist, strategic communications professional and member of the Kisii Press Club, with a focus on governance, legal affairs and public policy.
