A mini-bus from Super Metro. IMAGE/Facebook.. By JOYS MWENI. [email protected]. The unfortunate death of Gilbert Thuo Kimani, which allegedly resulted from an incident with a moving Super Metro bus, has led to significant controversy and public outrage. The details surrounding his death, conflicting accounts from his family, witnesses, and the bus company, as well as the response from Super Metro, create a complicated scenario regarding public accountability and corporate responsibility. Reports about Gilbert’s death initially suggested a fare disagreement between him and the bus tout, with claims that he was forcibly ejected from the bus for not paying an extra KSh 30. Eyewitnesses corroborated this narrative, stating that a confrontation happened after Gilbert boarded the Super Metro bus (with registration number KDL 125N) heading to Kahawa Wendani. According to their accounts, Gilbert tried to pay KSh 50 even though the fare demanded was KSh 80, which led to a heated argument. Afterwards, it was reported that the bus threw him out, leading to his fall onto the pavement, where he was subsequently run over by the same bus, resulting in his instant death. However, these assertions were quickly disputed by Gilbert’s family, especially his mother, who dismissed the idea that her son was involved in a fare argument. She claimed that Gilbert seldom had cash on hand and typically used his mobile wallet for payments, implying that the allegation regarding his fare was baseless. Upon receiving Gilbert’s mobile phone back from the police, his family discovered that it had money on it, which undermined the claim that he was unable to pay. This revelation not only disputes the original story but also raises questions about the credibility of the eyewitness accounts and the bus company’s initial explanation of what happened. Gilbert Kimani’s sister has addressed the media. IMAGE/Chuma Moto TV/User Generated Content. Super Metro has sought to disassociate itself from any direct accountability for Gilbert’s death in its reaction to the incident. The company asserted that Gilbert was not forcibly thrown from the vehicle; instead, he tried to exit while the bus was still moving and sadly lost his balance, leading to the fatal incident. An inspector from the company noted that had Gilbert been ejected forcefully, he would have ended up farther from the bus rather than being run over by it. This explanation, which challenges earlier assertions of wrongful ejection, raises additional concerns about the safety measures and operational protocols of the bus service. In light of public outrage, Super Metro promptly suspended the crew members involved, acknowledging possible misconduct or negligence and showing readiness to assist with the ongoing investigations. The company also promised the public that it values human life and disapproves of reckless conduct, committing to enhancing safety measures and staff training to avoid future occurrences. While these actions may seem to reflect corporate accountability, they suggest a more reactive than proactive stance on safety.
