By Mumo Judah, June 22, 2026
The Marsabit High Court has ordered the immediate release of three fishermen after finding that their eight-month incarceration was sufficient punishment for offences linked to fishing in a protected area, in a ruling that placed strong emphasis on their socio-economic background and illiteracy.
Justice Olel ordered the release of Samuel Chandamoe, Hosea Emekwi, and Amos Aite, stating that although the original sentence imposed by the lower court was legally sound, continued detention was no longer justified given the circumstances surrounding the case.
The three men were arrested on October 4, 2025, by wildlife rangers in the Alliaby area within the protected waters of Sibiloi National Park on Lake Turkana. They were accused of entering a restricted conservation zone without authorization and using illegal fishing gear, offences prosecuted under the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, 2013.
During their trial before a magistrate’s court, the accused pleaded guilty and were each fined up to Sh150,000 or, in default, sentenced to 12 months in prison. Unable to pay the fines, they began serving custodial sentences.
On appeal, the High Court was told that the fishermen were destitute, illiterate, and unaware of the boundaries of the protected marine area. They further pleaded for leniency, telling the court that they were first-time offenders and the sole providers for their families, whose livelihoods had been severely affected by their imprisonment.
In its judgment, the court acknowledged these arguments, noting that while ignorance of the law is not a defence, the broader social and economic realities could not be ignored when determining a fair and proportionate sentence.
Justice Olel held that the eight months already served constituted sufficient punishment, balancing the need for deterrence with the principles of restorative justice, and therefore ordered their immediate release.
The ruling has reignited discussions on how the justice system handles cases involving vulnerable and marginalized communities, particularly those whose offences stem from lack of awareness rather than deliberate criminal intent.
Legal observers say the judgment underscores the growing judicial trend of incorporating socio-economic considerations into sentencing decisions, especially in environmental and conservation-related offences involving local communities dependent on natural resources.
