NAIROBI, Kenya
Kenya Member of Parliament, John Waluke is headed to jail to serve the 67-year prison term slapped on him after the High Court declined to set aside his conviction in one of the most dramatic corruption cases in the country’s history.
Justice Esther Maina
dismissed the appeal lodged by Mr Waluke and his business
associate, Ms Grace Wakhungu, against their conviction and sentencing over the
Sh297 million maize scandal.
Consequently, Mr Waluke who is
a representative for Sirisia constituency will now serve 67 years in jail while
Ms Wakhungu will serve 69 years for fraud.
Justice Maina said the
sentences were not excessive and were within law.
"After carefully
considering evidence, this court came to the conclusion that the appeals
have no merit. The criminal charges were proved beyond reasonable
doubt," said the judge on Thursday while dismissing the appeal.
She also directed the appellants to pay their fines: Sh727 million for Mr Waluke and Sh707 million for Ms Wakhungu, or serve the jail sentences.
The judge found that the sum
of Sh297,386,505 paid to their trading company, Erad Supplies
and General Contractors Limited, by NCPB was based on a fraud. They were paid
the money in 2013.
“The invoice upon which the
claim for payment was based was a forgery. Mr Waluke presented it to an
arbitrator knowing very well Erad Supplies and General Contractors Limited had
no dealing with the maker of the invoice (Chelsea Freight Ltd) and as a result
it was paid the sums by a public body,” said Justice Maina. Sirisia MP John Waluke (right) and his associate Grace Wakhungu during a past court session.
The convicts faced five counts
related to uttering a false invoices, perjury (by knowingly giving false
evidence in an arbitration dispute between Erad and the National Cereal and
Produce Board) and fraudulent acquisition of public property. They committed
the offences between 2009 and 2013.
At trial, the prosecution
called 27 witnesses to testify in the corruption case that started following
investigations by the National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee.
The trial court found that the
graft offences committed were serious, saying evidence tabled by the
prosecution demonstrated that the invoice used to claim for the funds was fake,
hence there was fraud.
The genesis of the dispute is
the sum of Sh297 million received by the company from NCPB for supply of 40,000
metric tonnes of maize in 2004.
At the time there was scarcity
of maize in the country and the government had instructed NCPB, through the
Strategic Grain Reserve, to import maize. NCPB then floated a tender for the
supply of 180,000 metric tonnes of white maize.
Erad had won a tender from
NCPB for supply of 40,000 metric tonnes but was not issued with a letter of
credit, unlike the other four firms which had also won the tender.
The other firms were Hala
General Trading LLC (40,000 metric tonnes), Versatrade International CC (40,000
metric tonnes), Purma Holdings Ltd (30,000 metric tonnes) and Freba Investments
(30,000 metric tonnes).
Erad did not supply the maize
despite submitting its tender documents and executing the contract for the
supply of the same, the prosecution said.
When the contractual period
expired, the company and its directors, Mr Waluke and Ms Wakhungu,
successfully filed an arbitration for an award for storage charges and loss of
profit plus interest and cost of the arbitration. They claimed that storage
costs were incurred by Chelsea Freight.
The prosecution filed the
criminal charges on allegations that the invoice, which was the basis of the
claim for storage charges, and which was an exhibit in the arbitration
proceedings, was not genuine, hence the claim was based on a fraud.
The convicts were then charged
for the money which was paid to them from NCPB bank accounts pursuant to an
alleged false claim and a fraudulent invoice.
But in their appeal the
convicts insisted the payment was legal and legitimate.
Through lawyers Paul Muite,
Senior Counsel, and Elisha Ongoya, they explained that the payment stemmed from
breach of contract by the NCPB to supply the maize.
While prosecuting the appeal
against a magistrate court’s judgment, Mr Muite said the conviction was not
only erroneous but also the trial lacked legal foundation.
“The payment of the money
received by the appellant were pursuant to a High Court decree issued approving
and adopting an arbitration award. Payments such as this cannot, in law and
fact, form basis of a criminal charge of obtaining money fraudulently. Any
system of law that would allow payments made by the High Court to be basis of
criminal charges can only bring disrepute in the eyes of international
justice,” said Mr Muite.
He also argued that Erad had
been properly contracted by the government to supply the maize after drought
hit the country, but that NCPB breached the contract by failing to give the
company letters of credit upon securing maize abroad and preparing the
consignment for shipment.
Erad sued the State
Corporation at an arbitration tribunal for the breach of contract, and it was
awarded damages. The award was on two different levels: loss of profit where it
was awarded $1,960,000 and storage charges where it was awarded $1,146,000.
The lawyer said the company
later proceeded to the High Court for adoption of the arbitral awards. He said
the court ruled in favour of the company and attempts by the NCPB to review the
rulings were rejected by three judges, paving way for execution of the judgment
and the payments in dispute in year 2013.
The lawyer further said the
payments formed basis of the corruption case which culminated to conviction and
sentence of both Ms Wakhungu and Mr Waluke for theft of Sh297 million from the
public.
He explained that the criminal
trial was illegal and that the same could not have commenced before setting
aside of the arbitral award and the High Court judgment that endorsed the
award.
“Such orders would need to be
set aside first before there can be any suggestion of any criminality. Nothing
like that ever happened in this matter. Our hierarchy of court demands that
once a higher court has made a finding or delivered a judgment, the same is
binding to the lower court. It was not open to the lower court to open orders
issued by the High Court,” he stated.
There were never doubts about
the validity of the contract between NCPB and Erad Supplies Ltd as well as the
invoices, he argued. - Nation
No comments:
Post a Comment