The Judiciary has moved to set the record straight on a recent court decision involving police road barricades, after widespread confusion and misreporting of a High Court ruling sparked public debate.

The clarification comes in response to claims that the court had barred the police from mounting roadblocks, which the Judiciary now says is inaccurate and misleading.

In a statement released on Thursday, July 10, the Judiciary clarified that the ruling in Katiba Institute vs State Law Office, Petition No. E389 of 2025 did not ban the Inspector General of Police or any police unit from barricading roads.

 Rather, the temporary orders require that any such action must be accompanied by prior notice to the public.

"The orders are limited to imposing a requirement for prior and timely advisory/notices to the public before the emergency barricading of roads," said Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo.

The case was filed on June 25, 2025, by Katiba Institute, which challenged the police practice of blocking public roads without advance notice.

 The petitioner argued that the lack of timely information disrupted normal movement and inconvenienced many road users.

At the time of filing, the court declined to issue immediate orders and instead set the hearing for July 9, 2025. Despite being served, the State Law Office did not file a response or appear in court for the hearing. Due to this absence, the court granted temporary orders in favour of Katiba Institute.

The Judiciary emphasized that the decision was based on the State Law Office’s failure to participate in the proceedings. The orders are meant to protect public interest by ensuring that citizens are informed ahead of any road closures so they can plan their movements accordingly.

“The Judiciary further emphasized that the intention of the orders is to ensure that members of the public are informed in advance to plan their movements accordingly.”

This clarification aims to counter misinterpretations that the court had entirely prohibited police from using barricades. The Judiciary reiterated that the core issue in the case was the lack of communication with the public, not the legality of police roadblocks themselves.