LSK Withdraws From Blogger Ndiangui Kinyagia’s Case After Emerging He Faked His Own Abduction

Law Society cites “contradictory information” and breakdown in trust as blogger’s disappearance claims collapse

The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has dramatically withdrawn from representing blogger and activist Ndiangui Kinyagia after investigations revealed he had faked his own abduction, dealing a significant blow to what was initially framed as a case of state-sponsored enforced disappearance.

In a rare public repudiation, LSK’s legal team, VR Advocates & Partners LLP, filed court documents on July 24, 2025, seeking to cease all representation of Kinyagia following what they described as “very contradictory” statements that undermined the entire case.

The withdrawal comes after Kinyagia, who went missing from his house in Kinoo, Kiambu County on June 22, showed up in a Nairobi court on Thursday after weeks of speculation about his whereabouts.

From Missing Person to Legal Fraud

The case began as a high-profile habeas corpus application when LSK initially claimed that Kinyagia, known for his social media activism and blogging, had been abducted by state agents under suspicious circumstances.

The disappearance sparked widespread concern among human rights organizations and civil society groups.

LSK has asked the High Court to summon Ndiang’ui Kinyagia, his cousin, and mother, after conflicting accounts emerged over his 13-day disappearance, highlighting the contradictions that would ultimately unravel the case.

In a sworn affidavit filed by Advocate Moses Mutungi Kioko, LSK detailed how Kinyagia had provided statements and his family had given information that were “very contradictory from facts in this matter.”

The legal team stated that these contradictions made it “extremely difficult to continue representing him.”

Credibility at Stake

LSK President Faith Odhiambo.

The withdrawal represents an extraordinary step for LSK, which rarely abandons clients in such a public manner. Legal observers note that the move signals the organization’s commitment to maintaining institutional credibility within Kenya’s justice system.

Confusion over affidavits and legal representation in a case involving Ndiang’ui Kinyagia has forced the High Court to adjourn the matter to July 24, 2025, as inconsistencies between different parties claiming to represent the blogger emerged.

The case had initially raised serious concerns about enforced disappearances in Kenya, with the petition claiming Kinyagia had been abducted by the Inspector General of Police, the DCI and the Cabinet Secretary of the Ministry of Interior and National Administration.

Legal Implications

The revelation that Kinyagia had “gone into hiding voluntarily” has raised questions about the abuse of legal processes in politically sensitive matters.

Courts had issued orders for police chiefs to produce the blogger, believing him to be in state custody.

The Law Society of Kenya, which had previously represented Ndiang’ui, filed a notice to cease acting for the Petitioner, leaving him without legal counsel in court, forcing an adjournment as the blogger requested time to review court documents.

LSK’s decision to completely disown its co-petitioner sends a strong message about integrity within the legal profession.

The organization’s advocates noted that “several efforts to reach consensus” with Kinyagia had failed, making continued representation untenable.

The case unfolds against the backdrop of legitimate concerns about enforced disappearances and human rights violations in Kenya.

However, Kinyagia’s deception risks undermining genuine cases and eroding public trust in human rights advocacy.

The blogger’s actions have potentially compromised not only his own credibility but also that of organizations that supported him during his alleged disappearance.

The case serves as a cautionary tale about the verification of claims in sensitive human rights matters.

As the legal drama continues, the focus now shifts to potential consequences for Kinyagia, who may face charges related to providing false information to the court and wasting judicial resources.

The case also raises questions about the vetting processes for high-profile human rights cases.

The withdrawal by LSK marks a significant moment in Kenya’s legal landscape, demonstrating that even established human rights organizations will not hesitate to distance themselves from cases built on deception, regardless of the potential embarrassment or political implications.

The matter is set to continue before Justice Chacha Mwita, with Kinyagia now seeking to represent himself or find new legal counsel.