providing justice in a politically charged setting - Kenya in 1954. Thus, in many
ways, it questions the nature of the courts and how rationality and judgment were
factors rooted in a specific time and locale. In looking back at this particular time,
it is clear that the case is full of contradictions and changing judicial rules.
Despite issues associated with the delayed time in reporting Mau Mau oathing
incidents, the apparent collaboration of witness testimonies and revealed
discrepancies, the court decision was clear and concise. On November 4, 1954
in Nairobi, the accused individuals Mutisya, Mwo, and Kandu were executed by
hanging for their involvement in the administration of the Mau Mau oath. The
finality of the court decision to execute was surprising since there was so much
ambiguity in the case. The court trial began on August 6, 1954 in Nairobi. The
Court Clerk interpreted all information and material in Kikamba with all of the
accused pleading “not guilty” to all counts.82 In order to examine key aspects of
the case, specific details are represented and analyzed. This analysis begins
with the perspective of Mutisya.
The Perspective of the Case Related to Mutisya
Mutisya was charged for giving the Mau Mau oath to Kasina Nguku and to
Mutete Manyi. The alleged guilt of Mutisya was based on the testimonies of
several individuals. One of the testimonies was from Michael Digby Meehan, the
Assistant Superintendent of Police in charge of the branch in Machakos. Meehan
testified that on January 30 the accused Mutisya desired to, but did not confess.
82Case file notes, KNA MLA 1/1007-CC 127/1954. Case #127 Rex vs. Harun Waau Mutisya, Philip
Nthekani Mwo, and Sounsza Kandu.
140