A former driver of Murang’a Governor Irungu Kang’ata has moved to court accusing the governor and the Senate of falsely naming him as a petitioner in a case linked to the 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crash.

Through lawyer Suiyanka Lempaa, David Mburu Karanja argues that Kang’ata unlawfully listed him in a Senate petition regarding lack of support for families of victims of Flight ET 302, which crashed on March 10, 2019, killing all 157 people on board.

In his application, Karanja wants the court to issue orders compelling Kang’ata to provide information requested in a letter dated February 5, 2025, referenced Gen/L/3/25/086, pending full hearing and determination of the petition.

"Pending the hearing and determination of the Application, the Court be pleased to issue a conservatory order restraining the Respondents by themselves, their employees, servants, agents, successors, assignees or person acting or claiming through or under them from relying upon, referencing, or making use of the Petitioner's name emanating from the impugned Senate Petition dated June 19, 2019 or any related proceedings there from without engaging him and/or his authorised agents," Karanja states in court documents.

Karanja is also seeking orders directing the respondents to produce all records of the Senate petition dated June 19, 2019, including the list of petitioners, for inspection and verification.

According to him, the petition that was received by the Senate in June 2019 unlawfully included his name despite the fact that he had no family ties with any of the crash victims.

He says the petition was considered and deliberated by a Senate Standing Committee without his knowledge, participation, or consent, a move he insists violated his right to a fair hearing and damaged his reputation.

Karanja adds that on November 11, 2024, the Senate received a letter questioning how his name and those of seven other former employees of Kang’ata were included in the petition.

He says the Senate’s response only worsened the misrepresentation by suggesting that he and others took part in the deliberations.

Despite writing to various offices, including the Commission on Administrative Justice, Karanja argues that the responses he received were “inadequate, evasive and a culmination of general denials.”

"The 1st Respondent's written response to the Commission on Administrative Justice purports to distance himself from any personal relationship with the petitioners, including the Petitioner, which directly contradicts his own recorded statements in the Senate report, where he acknowledges knowing the petitioners personally and having advised them to file the petition. This discrepancy raises serious concerns of misrepresentation and abuse of office and parliamentary privileges that warrant urgent judicial scrutiny," Karanja states.

He insists that the matter is of public interest and justice requires that his petition and application be heard urgently.