Deputy Inspector General of Police Eliud Lagat sparked widespread debate on Monday after announcing that he would be "stepping aside" from his duties to allow for investigations into the death of teacher and blogger Albert Ojwang.
In a letter dated June 16, Lagat stated that his decision was made in good conscience to avoid interfering with the ongoing probe.
“In light of the ongoing investigations into the unfortunate death of Mr. Albert Ojwang, I have decided to step aside from my role as DIG until the investigations are complete,” his letter read.
While many Kenyans initially welcomed Lagat's move, it quickly stirred confusion over what exactly "stepping aside" means in a legal context—especially for someone in his position.
According to existing laws and regulations, a Deputy Inspector General can only legally leave office through resignation, interdiction, suspension, or dismissal—not simply by "stepping aside."
Under the National Police Service Commission's guidelines, a DIG may be interdicted by the Inspector General while under investigation. This means the officer is temporarily stripped of operational duties but remains on payroll and officially in office.
The President also holds the power to suspend or remove a DIG, based on advice from the Commission, for reasons like misconduct or incompetence.
According to the Public Officers Ethics Act, a DIG can leave office in three ways: by resigning through a written notice to the President via the Inspector General, by being asked to step aside due to an investigation, or by being removed due to legal violations or misconduct. In Lagat’s case, he has not submitted a formal resignation.
Kenyans.co.ke spoke to High Court advocate Joshua Malidzo, who explained that Lagat's action carries little legal weight.
“In law, ‘stepping aside’ doesn’t mean much. If he were serious, he would have resigned,” Malidzo said.
However, Malidzo noted that the move might be a tactical one. By stepping aside without resigning, Lagat may be preserving his position in case he's eventually cleared of wrongdoing.
“It’s a common political strategy—create space for investigations to take place, and if nothing sticks, you come back without a blemish on your record,” he explained.
Still, Malidzo pointed out that Lagat’s statement may work against him, giving civil society groups a basis to argue that he is indeed a key suspect in the Ojwang case.
In summary, Lagat’s decision to step aside is only symbolic. He remains in office legally, just without actively performing his duties. If the investigation clears him, he could return to his role as DIG without facing any formal consequences.