A Kenyan diplomat’s son, who was accused of sexually assaulting a five-year-old girl on a school bus in August 2023, has left India with his family after the Kenyan government withdrew the diplomat from their posting, sources in the country confirmed on Wednesday. The incident, which sparked an intense legal battle over diplomatic immunity, has left the victim's family devastated and questioning the actions (or lack thereof) by both Indian and Kenyan authorities. A Delhi court had set April 7, 2024, as the next hearing date in the molestation case against a Kenyan diplomat’s son. Indian media reports indicate he was quietly flown back to Nairobi with the help of Kenyan authorities Nearly 10 months after the alleged assault, investigators were forced to halt proceedings when they discovered the suspect was shielded by diplomatic immunity. As the son of a foreign diplomat, he was protected from prosecution in India under international law, placing significant limitations on the investigation. The victim's father expressed frustration over the outcome, which he claims allows the accused to avoid justice despite having allegedly assaulted at least six other children. "We were informed last week that the accused and his family had departed India without facing any charges," he told local Indian media. "This is deeply disappointing. We believe there are at least six other victims, and yet, nothing has been done to hold him accountable." The Delhi Police had filed an FIR on September 19, 2023, under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and an aggravated sexual assault charge under Section 10.' However, these efforts were undermined when they learned that the diplomat’s son was protected by immunity, leading to a complicated legal situation. A source within the police force, speaking on condition of anonymity, revealed that requests to question the accused had been lodged through the Union Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), but these requests remained pending due to the protocols surrounding diplomatic immunity. The issue was complicated further when the Indian side formally requested the Kenyan government to waive immunity, but these appeals were ignored. Instead, Kenya chose to withdraw the diplomat and his family from India, a move that many critics see as an attempt to shield the diplomat’s son from facing legal consequences. The Kenyan government’s stance has raised alarm and deepened suspicions of a cover-up. While diplomatic immunity is a well-established practice in international relations, critics argue that Kenya’s decision not to waive immunity or to take any meaningful action shows a concerning disregard for justice. The victim’s father also expressed his belief that the Kenyan High Commission’s inaction facilitated the departure of the accused without any repercussions. "Despite the registration of three FIRs against the boy, nothing has been done. The Kenyan High Commission chose not to revoke the diplomatic immunity, allowing the accused to flee before facing any charges," the victim's father added. "This sends a terrible message about the treatment of victims and the lack of accountability for those in positions of power." The case has also prompted wider scrutiny of how both Indian and Kenyan authorities handled the investigation and the ongoing concerns over the school’s role in reporting and preventing the abuse. The legal proceedings in India are far from over.
Last month, the victim’s family took the case to the Delhi High Court, alleging that the school had failed to properly prevent and report the abuse, violating the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights' (NCPCR) 2021 Manual on Safety and Security of Children in Schools, a crucial document designed to safeguard minors from abuse.
The hearing is set for April 7, 2025. As for the diplomatic immunity issue, the Kenyan government’s actions have raised concerns among child protection activists who believe that diplomatic privileges should not be used as a shield for criminal behavior, particularly in cases involving minors.
Critics argue that the Kenyan government’s refusal to waive immunity and the subsequent withdrawal of the diplomat’s family effectively allowed the accused to escape any form of legal accountability.
This case serves as a glaring reminder of the power of diplomatic immunity, which, in this instance, appears to have shielded an accused individual from facing justice.
For the victim’s family, this is a bitter blow, and their fight for justice continues despite the barriers placed before them by both Kenyan and Indian authorities.
The family’s anguish is compounded by the belief that the accused, now out of the country, will not be held accountable for the harm caused to their daughter and the other children who allegedly suffered similar abuse.