Home National News Relief for Tanathi CEO Fredrick Mwamati as Court Drops KSh. 292 Million...

Relief for Tanathi CEO Fredrick Mwamati as Court Drops KSh. 292 Million Kitui Graft Charges

777

Relief for Tanathi Water Works Development Agency CEO Fredrick Mwamati came as a court allowed the withdrawal of graft charges against him and eight others in a KSh. 292.7 million embezzlement case involving a water project in Kitui County.

Kitui Chief Magistrate David Mburu ruled in favor of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Renson Ingonga, who sought to drop the charges, citing public interest and the need to avoid an abuse of the legal process. The DPP argued that there was no financial loss, as the contractor was still working on the project.

Mwamati, along with co-accused David Otieno Mwango, Duncan Mulandi, Dickson Mugambi, and three companies, faced charges related to the Kinanie Leather Industrial Park Water Supply Project.

The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) had claimed that the tender for the project was irregularly awarded to Perma Structural Engineering Company Ltd, prompting the arrest of Mwamati in June 2024. The other suspects were arraigned in July, but plea-taking was deferred after they requested a review of the decision to charge them.

The case focused on alleged irregular alterations to the water pipes in the project. However, the DPP defended the changes, stating they were done through public participation and were approved as part of the project’s normal operations.

He also assured the court that no additional payments had been made to the contractor since the charges were filed and that the project was 91% complete.

On September 25, 2024, the DPP applied to withdraw the case under section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code. He argued that continuing the prosecution would not serve the public interest, as there was no evidence of misappropriation and the project was progressing well. The DPP emphasized that the pipe alterations did not undermine the integrity of the project.

The EACC opposed the withdrawal of the charges, insisting that the procurement process was flawed and that the evidence against the accused was strong. They argued that no new information had emerged to justify dropping the case. Despite their objections, the court found that the EACC had failed to present convincing evidence to challenge the DPP’s decision.

Chief Magistrate Mburu pointed out that the EACC could not act as both investigator and complainant in the matter, while affirming that the State, represented by the DPP, is the rightful complainant in such cases. He further stated that the EACC had not demonstrated that the DPP’s account of the project’s progress was inaccurate

After reviewing all arguments, Magistrate Mburu ruled that the DPP had presented valid grounds for withdrawing the charges. The decision ended a highly publicized legal battle involving significant public funds and a major infrastructure project.

Ends///

1 COMMENT

  1. Who’s right here isn’t the issue. The main issue is what are the motives and why should the two bodies or one of them waste public money by doing shoddy investigation! I think the court is right as an arbiter.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here