The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has turned up the heat on former Migori Governor Zacharia Okoth Obado and his co-accused, urging the Milimani High Court to throw the book at them over the brutal 2018 murder of university student Sharon Otieno.
In a charged courtroom session, Senior Assistant DPP Gikui Gichuhi laid out what the State described as a cold, calculated elimination mission — not a crime of passion, not a misunderstanding, but a carefully choreographed operation meant to silence Sharon and shield the powerful interests of former Migori Governor Zacharia Okoth Obado from political embarrassment.
“The evidence paints a coherent picture of the accused acting in concert, with a shared intention to eliminate Sharon Otieno and silence a witness (ABC) to avoid political fallout, reputational harm and embarrassment,” Gichuhi told a packed courtroom.
According to the prosecution, the murder was not spontaneous but a carefully orchestrated and joint criminal enterprise executed through trusted insiders. The State’s case paints a picture of insiders closing ranks. Trusted aides, Michael Juma Oyamo and Casper Ojwang Obiero, became operatives. Phones were active. Movements were tracked. A vehicle KCL 418K, linked to Obiero’s household and driven by a longtime associate, featured prominently in what prosecutors called an unbroken evidentiary chain.
At the centre of the alleged execution plan were co-accused Michael Juma Oyamo and Casper Ojwang Obiero, whom the prosecution described as key players on the ground. Both were allegedly present at Graca Hotel on September 3, 2018, the last place Sharon and a surviving witness were seen before what prosecutors say was a calculated abduction.
The State walked the court through witness accounts, cyber-forensic data, call records, and investigative findings, arguing that each piece fits seamlessly into a larger, disturbing puzzle.
“This is not speculation. The evidence converges. From the start, we committed to showing the court that the evidence, like pieces of a puzzle, forms a complete picture of the events that led to Sharon’s tragic death,” The prosecution insisted.
In a direct attack on the defence, the ODPP dismissed their arguments as inconsistent and strategically constructed to manufacture doubt where none exists.
“There is no reasonable doubt,” the State maintained, pressing the court to convict.
The case has gripped the nation for years, not just because of the tragedy itself, but because it raised uncomfortable questions about power, influence, and whether justice bends when politics enters the room.
When an ordinary citizen stands accused of murder, the machinery of justice often moves swiftly and without ceremony. But when a prominent political figure is implicated, the stakes change. Legal strategies grow more complex. Public narratives become polarised.
Allegations of interference, delay tactics, and witness intimidation inevitably enter the discourse, whether proven or speculative. Even the perception of unequal treatment is enough to erode confidence in institutions.
Obado, Oyamo, and Obiero deny the charges. However, the court has already ruled that they have a case to answer, signalling that the evidence presented meets the legal threshold for trial.
All eyes now turn to March 18, 2026, when the judges are expected to announce a date for judgment in a case that has come to symbolise the collision between power and accountability in Kenya. The question that lingers: Will justice be blind or intimidated?
Additionally, the case reignited conversations about gender-based violence, accountability of public officials, and the vulnerability of individuals entangled in relationships where power imbalances exist. Many viewed the proceedings as a reflection of broader societal issues, in which women often bear a disproportionate risk in politically sensitive circumstances.
The court has already ruled that the trio have a case to answer, setting the stage for a dramatic conclusion to the years-long legal battle. Judges will reconvene on March 18, 2026, when the date for the long-awaited judgment is expected to be announced.
Ultimately, the case stands at the intersection of tragedy and accountability. Its outcome will not only determine the fate of the accused, but also shape public confidence in whether Kenya’s legal system can withstand the gravitational pull of political power.
In that sense, the trial has become more than a legal proceeding. It is a referendum on the strength — or fragility — of the rule of law.
