The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) Tuesday revealed plans to appeal the acquittal of Kapseret Member of Parliament Oscar Sudi by the High Court in a case where he was accused of forging academic documents.
The MP was facing charges of making a false declaration to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) during the 2013 General Election and forging a Diploma Certificate in Business Management from the Kenya Institute of Management (KIM) as well as a KCSE certificate after he claimed to have sat for the exam at Highway Secondary School in Nairobi.
The court on June 7, 2024 acquitted the MP saying the prosecution had failed to prove its case, adding it also produced no formal documents to back up the allegations against him.
It also noted that the manner in which the investigation was conducted was irregular since the Investigating Officer carried out interrogations in a hotel.
In a letter to Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Renson Ingonga on June 18, the commission wants the court to reopen the case citing three grounds of dissatisfaction including prejudicial investigative lapses, lack of critical exhibits, and the venue of recording statements.
The commission told the DPP that in its view, Milimani Anti-Corruption Magistrate Felix Kombo erred in law and fact by failing to find that Sudi had a case to answer for forging academic certificates, thereby acquitting him of all the nine charges.
On the first ground, EACC faults the court for throwing out the case owing to the fact that the prosecution obtained the evidence illegally and without notifying the MP, contrary to stipulations of the law.
The anti-graft agency argues that contrary to the court ruling, the investigation officer obtained the evidence from Sudi even before he was declared an accused person in the case, and that the MP had also recorded a statement confirming his academic credentials to the IEBC.
“At the time of the taking of the statement, and receiving the documents from the accused, he had neither been charged in any court of law nor a decision to charge him reached. In essence, he was not an accused person,” EACC says.
“Secondly, the accused recorded a plain statement which confirmed that he had the qualifications that he had indicated in his self-declaration form submitted to the IEBC on 30th January 2013 for purposes of the General Elections held on 4th March 2013.”
An official said; “Pursuant to the consent issued by DPP vide a letter dated July 13, 2016 to charge Oscar Sudi, Chief Inspector Fredrick Muchugia Mwangi recorded Oscar Sudi’s charge and cautionary statement on October 5, 2016 upon his arrest and before his arraignment in court on October 6, 2016.”
The commission says the court also erred in stating that the prosecution did not present formal and certified academic documents as verified by the IEBC.
The EACC disputed the ruling noting that the electoral body does not produced of any of the said documents.
“IEBC is not the maker of any of these documents i.e. KCSE certificate, School Leaving Certificate, and KIM Diploma certificate. The IEBC received copies from the accused person for purposes of complying with the rules for the nomination of candidates to contest an election.”
“The court, therefore, erred in ruling that IEBC should have certified the impugned certificates. By making this ruling midstream during the testimony of the Investigating Officer and disallowing production, the court effectively locked out exhibits that were central to the case and then proceeded to make a finding that the Investigating Officer did not produce the documents,” EACC argues.
Regarding the manner of interrogations where the court faulted the place where the statement was recorded, EACC says the court made the ruling without pointing out evidence of irregularity or impropriety.
Email your news TIPS to Editor@kahawatungu.com or WhatsApp +254707482874
