NAIROBI, Kenya, Mar 24 — The arrest of former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju has thrust Section 129 of Kenya’s Penal Code into the spotlight — a little-known law that could carry a jail term of up to three years.
At the centre of the case is a simple but weighty legal question: did Tuju knowingly give false information to police?
What the law says
Section 129 provides that “whoever gives to any person employed in the public service any information which he knows or believes to be false… is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for three years.”
The law is designed to protect public institutions from being misled — especially law enforcement.
To secure a conviction, prosecutors must prove:
The information given was false
The person knew or believed it was false
It caused — or was likely to cause — police to act on it
Why it matters in Tuju’s case
The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) claims Tuju’s reported disappearance was staged, arguing he never left his Karen residence.
DCI Director Mohammed Amin says investigators established “without an iota of doubt” that Tuju was at home throughout — even when his phone went off.
If that position holds, authorities could argue:
His claim of being trailed — including by a numberless Toyota Land Cruiser — was false
The report triggered a full police response, including deployment of officers and forensic teams
That response meets the legal threshold of causing public officers to act on misleading information
Tuju’s defence
Tuju, however, insists he went into hiding out of fear for his life after being followed, and says he even reported the matter to police.
If his account is supported by evidence:
The claim would not be considered false
Section 129 would likely not apply
What investigators will rely on
The case will hinge on hard evidence, including:
Phone and location data
CCTV or traffic surveillance
Witness testimony, including those who allegedly hosted him
Forensic findings from his abandoned vehicle
Bigger picture
The National Police Service says false reports are a growing concern, warning they:
Waste critical resources
Create unnecessary public alarm
Undermine trust in security agencies
Amin has described the Tuju case as part of a broader pattern of “staged disappearances.”
Bottom line
The “3-year jail risk” is real — but not automatic.
For Raphael Tuju, everything now turns on intent and truth:
If proven false and deliberate → possible criminal liability under Section 129
If proven genuine → the focus shifts to who, if anyone, was trailing him
Until then, the case remains a high-stakes test of both evidence and credibility — with legal consequences hanging in the balance.