ational as her guardian and Next friend) & 11 others v COMMISSIONER OF POLICE/INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL POL been disclosed. Under Article 22(1), everyonehas the right to institute court proceedings for enforcement of Bill of Rights. Article 22(1),(a),(b),(c), and (d) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 provides:“22. (1) Every person has the right to institute court proceedings claiming that a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights has been denied, violated or infringed, or is threatened. (2) In addition to a person acting in their own interest, court proceedings under clause (1) may be instituted by–– (a) a person acting on behalf of another person who cannot act in their own name; (b) a person acting as a member of, or in the interest of, a group or class of persons; (c) a person acting in the public interest; or (d) an association acting in the interest of one or more of its members.” Further Article 23(1) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 provides: “23. (1) The High Court has jurisdiction, in accordance with Article 165, to hear and determine applications for redress of a denial, violation or infringement of, or threat to, a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights.” In view of the foregoing I find and hold everyone has the right to institute court proceedings claiming that a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights has been denied, violated or infringed and the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain such proceedings and determine applications for redress of a denial, violation or infringement of, or threat to, a right on fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights. I therefore find no merits on 1st and 3rdrespondents grounds of opposition and the same are rejected and dismissed. The 2nd respondent through its replying affidavit dated 17th January, 2012 by Mr. Jackson Motende, State Counsel, in the office of the Director of Public Prosecution, Meru office referred to Article 157(4) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 which gives the Director of Public Prosecution power to direct the Inspector-General of the National Police Service to investigate any information or allegation of criminal conduct. He averred that court directions were given in accordance with the said Article and attached a letter dated 29th May, 2012 marked “JM”. The said letter is only on complaint by 2 victims and not all petitioners in this petition as can be observed. That since the said letter, it appears there had been no follow up or response from the DCIO. Significantly the letter was not written to Inspector General nor was it copied to the said office. The affidavit of the learned State Counsel Mr. J. Motende is clear that no action has been taken on the petitioners’ complaints as he depones that majority of the complaints contained in the petition were never received by the 2ndrespondent. Strange enough there is no affidavit filed denying that the petitioners reported to the various police stations mentioned in the petition and in the supportive affidavit. I therefore do not find any basis of the 2nd respondent denying petitioners complaints were not reported to police stations mentioned in the petition. The 2nd respondent has not given any reason for their refusal, neglect, omission to act on the petitioners’ complaints and their failure to prosecute the perpetrators promptly upon receipt of the various complaints. The 2ndrespondent’s assertion that it is wrongfully enjoined to this petition is without any basis. Article 157(6), (a), (b), (c) and http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 8/17