The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) has opposed a bail request by a man serving a 30-year sentence for his role in the Dusit D2 terror attack.
Prosecutors argue the gravity of terrorism offences and public safety concerns outweigh his medical and family grounds for release pending appeal.
According to the statement released on Wednesday by the ODPP, the application was filed at the Kiambu High Court by Mohamed Abdi Ali, a 61-year-old convict who is seeking release on bail pending the hearing and determination of his appeal.
Mohamed was convicted on May 22, 2025 and sentenced on June 19, 2025, to serve an aggregate sentence of 30 years’ imprisonment for conspiring with others to commit a terrorist act and facilitating the January 2019 attack at the Dusit D2 Hotel complex.
The attack resulted in the deaths of 21 people and remains one of the country’s most serious terrorism-related incidents in recent years.
Mohamed lodged his appeal on June 27, 2025 and has now sought bail under a certificate of urgency, citing medical and family grounds.
However, the DPP has strongly opposed the request, maintaining that the offences committed were severe and had far-reaching consequences.
Representing the prosecution, Duncan Ondimu told the court that the offences committed by Mohamed are serious and terrorism-related.
He further argued that the gravity of the crimes weighs heavily against the grant of bail pending appeal, in the interest of public safety and maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice.
The prosecution emphasized that bail pending appeal should not be granted automatically and must be based on compelling circumstances, which they argue have not been demonstrated in this case.
Ondimu submitted that granting bail would undermine the seriousness with which the justice system treats terrorism offences.
He also told the court that the appropriate course of action would be to prioritise the hearing of the appeal itself rather than consider temporary release.
“The interests of justice would be best served by prioritizing the expeditious hearing and determination of the appeal rather than granting bail on insufficient grounds,” Ondimu said.
In opposing the application, the prosecution further argued that Mohamed had not shown that remaining in custody would cause him undue or irreversible harm while awaiting the outcome of his appeal.
Ondimu told the court that the applicant had failed to demonstrate any irreparable prejudice he would suffer if the appeal was heard while he remained in lawful custody.
The DPP also assured the court that the prosecution is prepared to ensure the appeal proceeds without unnecessary delay.
Ondimu stated that the DPP’s office is ready and willing to proceed with the appeal without delay.
Prosecutors additionally questioned the strength of Mohamed’s appeal, arguing that the application lacked evidence showing a strong likelihood of success.
Ondimu told the court, “The applicant has not demonstrated that the appeal has overwhelming chances of success but merely expresses dissatisfaction with the findings and conclusions of the trial court.”
Mohamed’s legal team has argued that his application was filed urgently due to personal circumstances, including medical and family considerations.
However, the prosecution maintains that such grounds do not outweigh the seriousness of the offences and the potential implications for public safety.
The Kiambu High Court is now expected to consider the arguments from both sides as it determines whether Mohamed should be released on bail while awaiting the hearing of his appeal.
The case has been scheduled for mention on February 28, 2026, when the court is expected to provide further direction on the matter.
The outcome is likely to attract significant public attention, given the scale of the Dusit D2 attack and its impact on national security and public confidence in the criminal justice system.
