The High Court has issued interim orders restraining popular Kikuyu musician Samuel Muchoki, widely known as Samidoh, from contacting or interfering with a woman who has accused him of rape.
“…pending the hearing and determination of the instant application, an interim non-contact and non-interference order is hereby issued restraining the Interested Party, whether by himself, his servants, agents or assigns, from contacting, intimidating, harassing or otherwise interfering…” reads the order.
What protections did the court grant the complainant?
Justice Lawrence Mugambi directed that the woman, identified in court papers only as M.R.W. to safeguard her dignity and security, must be protected from harassment or intimidation during the proceedings. The judge also ordered that all pleadings and documents be sealed to conceal her full identity, with court sessions held in camera if necessary.
Additionally, police have been instructed to forensically secure and preserve all documentary, digital, and electronic evidence provided by the complainant. This includes audio and messaging records she claims contain incriminating exchanges. Written preservation notices must be issued immediately to the relevant custodians.
What are the allegations against Samidoh?
In her petition, M.R.W. accuses the artist of sexual assault and has asked the court to compel investigations. She claims to have preserved digital evidence, including audio recordings and electronic messages, in which he allegedly insulted and threatened her. In one exchange, she says Samidoh dismissed her confrontation by calling her a “professional prostitute.”
The complainant further alleges that between 2021 and 2023, Samidoh engaged in manipulative and coercive communication, shifting between intimidation and feigned friendliness.
What orders is the complainant seeking?
Through Kaaya Memba & Company Advocates, M.R.W. is seeking urgent directions for the police to investigate her case, preserve her evidence, and involve the Attorney General in requesting mutual legal assistance from U.S. authorities for certified records. She has also asked the court to direct the Witness Protection Agency to assess her risk and provide protection, citing fears of harassment and intimidation.
She argues that the state’s failure to act has violated her constitutional rights, including dignity, equality, freedom, and security of the person, fair administrative action, and access to justice.
By Risper Akinyi