Cult leader Mackenzie boycotts bail hearing, cites mistreatment in prison

His lawyer, Wycliffe Makasembo, told the court that Mackenzie had boycotted the hearing due to discriminatory treatment by prison officials. 

Makasembo informed the court that Mackenzie had complained about being separated from the other suspects. 

Mackenzie also expressed concerns about abduction, complicating the proceedings and prompting his lawyer to seek an adjournment to counsel his client on the subject.

However, the prosecution team, which included Principal Prosecution Counsel Anthony Musyoka and Senior Prosecution Counsel Peris Ongega, was vehemently opposed to the adjournment, dismissing Mackenzie's claims as mere theatrics designed to stall the legal proceedings.

The prosecution requested that the court make the decision in Mackenzie's absence, citing Article 50 of the Constitution, which allows for the trial of accused individuals in absentia under certain conditions. 

They also stated that Mackenzie's status as a convicted prisoner required his separation from co-accused remandees.

The court was informed of Mackenzie's alleged role in radicalising and encouraging hunger strikes among other accused individuals, which posed serious security risks.

In response, Justice Juma summoned the officer in charge of Shimo la Tewa Maximum Security Prison and the investigating officer to discuss the concerns raised. 

The court also directed the probation department to prepare bail reports to help assess the DPP's application to oppose bail.

Juma also directed the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) to provide psychosocial reports on each of the accused individuals.

 The court scheduled further directions for March 27, 2024, when the case will be mentioned again.