Dear Wakili,

What legal liabilities could a matatu crew face when a passenger faints, is abandoned by the roadside, and later dies?

***

Relationships and obligations must be grounded in dignity, empathy, and responsibility, even where ideological or philosophical differences are irreconcilable. Dumping a patient, passenger, or any person suffering illness is cruel, inhuman, and primitive. The decision in AGM (Suing on Behalf of a Minor AMG – Deceased) v Buscar East Africa Limited (Civil Case 273 of 2019) [2026] judgement of 2026 illustrates how a humane attitude can significantly shape circumstances, outcomes, and the deliberateness of actions taken by duty bearers.

The central issue is whether the matatu crew’s actions amount to criminal negligence, manslaughter, or civil liability. Matatu crews operate under a non‑verbal contract of carriage with every passenger they transport. Under this contract, and in line with principles governing public service vehicles (PSVs), they owe passengers a duty of care—a legal obligation requiring them to ensure the safety and wellbeing of passengers throughout the journey.

This duty begins the moment a crew assists a passenger to embark and ends only when the passenger is safely delivered to their destination. The law does not entertain the “back‑seat driver,” meaning passengers have no control over how the vehicle is driven. This principle was affirmed in Rosemary Mwasya v Steve Tito Mwasya & Others (2018), where the court held that a passenger “had no control over the manner in which the appellant drove or managed the vehicle.” The implication is clear: because passengers cannot control the vehicle, the crew’s duty of care is heightened.

Read: Matatu crew forced me to alight on a highway. Why was I arrested?

This duty extends to medical emergencies. Once a passenger is in a PSV, the crew must take reasonable steps to ensure their safety, including seeking help when illness or distress becomes apparent. Dumping an unwell passenger by the roadside is therefore both inhumane and professionally irresponsible. It constitutes a breach of the duty of care.

The first legal pathway that may arise is criminal liability. Under Sections 202–205 of the Penal Code, manslaughter occurs where death results from gross negligence or an unlawful act. The state could argue that the crew acted with gross negligence by abandoning a passenger who required urgent assistance. They had the means to transport the passenger to a hospital or police station but chose instead to leave them unattended. The law assumes that any reasonable person would know that abandoning an unconscious individual exposes them to grave harm. This failure to act, especially within the crew’s line of duty, may satisfy the threshold for criminal negligence.

Kenyan courts have previously addressed similar situations. In the 2018 Republic v Amos Muigai Mwangi & Alex Musembi Musyoka (judgement in 2026), the High Court found a matatu crew criminally liable for a passenger’s death after demonstrating “complete disregard for passenger safety.” The crew were sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Section 244 of the Penal Code criminalises failure to render assistance where a duty exists. If the crew’s omission contributed to harm or death, the court may interpret this as a violation of their statutory and contractual duty to safeguard passengers.

While criminal liability focuses on punishment, many families pursue civil liability. Under the Fatal Accidents Act and Law Reform Act, the estate or representative of the deceased may file a claim for negligence and wrongful death. Courts have held PSV operators liable for breaching duty of care even when harm arose from circumstances beyond the passenger’s control.

Read: What to do when a matatu conductor refuses to return your change

In Matunda (Fruits) Bus Services Ltd v Ayieko, the court affirmed liability where the operator failed to uphold the duty of care. Civil claims may also extend to the Sacco or company that owns the vehicle through vicarious liability. This doctrine holds employers responsible for the wrongful acts of their employees committed in the course of duty. Thus, both the matatu owner and the Sacco may be legally accountable for the crew’s conduct.

To strengthen duty of care in the transport sector, courts play a critical role. They listen to cases and determine appropriate punishment or compensation depending on their jurisdictional pathway. In their decisions, a need to reinforce standards required of PSVs under the Traffic Act, PSV licensing conditions, and NTSA regulations.

These frameworks exist to ensure passenger safety and cannot be selectively applied. Ultimately, humane conduct and legal responsibility are inseparable, while significantly necessary in public service. Abandoning a vulnerable passenger violates both moral and legal obligations.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.