This archive report was first published on 20 May 2020.
On May 20, 2020, a ruling by Milimani Chief Magistrate Douglas Ogoti sparked controversy in Kenya's fight against corruption. The ruling requires the Director of Public Prosecutions to share documentary and electronic evidence with suspects before trial can begin.
This departure from the common practice of sharing evidence with suspects after charges have been pressed in court has raised concerns that it will hinder the government's efforts to combat graft. The ruling has been criticized for making it difficult for prosecutors to win cases against corruption suspects.
Lawyer Tom Ojienda has already exploited this loophole to escape charges of fraudulently acquiring Sh89 million from the Mumias Sugar Company. Ojienda used the Court of Appeal ruling that investigators need permission from suspects before obtaining evidence to his advantage.
Similarly, Ojienda represented former Nairobi Governor Evans Kidero and exploited the same loophole to stop a witness from producing copies of Kidero's bank statements. The bank statements contained crucial evidence in the Ksh213 million corruption trial.
These rulings have raised concerns that the Judiciary is weakening the fight against corruption. The Supreme Court must stand up and correct these strange rulings by the lower courts to demonstrate its commitment to the war on graft.
