Blow to Waititu as High Court upholds 12-year sentence in Sh588m graft case

Audio By Vocalize

Former Kiambu governor Ferdinand Waititu and two others have suffered a major blow after the High Court upheld their convictions and sentences in a Sh588 million graft case.

Justice Rose Ougo of the Milimani Anti-Corruption High Court found that the DPP had proved beyond reasonable doubt that they were involved in the irregular award of a multi-million-shilling road tender.

The judge dismissed appeals by Waititu, his co-accused Charles Chege and Luka Mwahiya, upholding their convictions and sentences over the fraudulent procurement of the road works in Kiambu County.

The judge also upheld the trial court's order barring the convicted persons from holding public office for 10 years.

In a significant development, Justice Ougo also allowed the State's cross-appeal against the acquittal of Waititu's wife, Susan Wangari, and two co-accused on money laundering charges.

The judge set aside their acquittals and convicted them of money laundering, directing that they be returned to the trial court for mitigation and sentencing.

Waititu and Wangari were ordered to be remanded at Lang'ata Women's GK Prison, while Mwahiya and Chege were directed to return to prison to continue serving their sentences.

The court ordered the four to be produced before the Milimani Anti-Corruption Chief Magistrate's Court on Monday next week for mitigation and sentencing on the money laundering charges.

In her ruling, Justice Ougo said the convictions and penalties imposed by the trial court were lawful, dismissing the accused persons' challenges to the sentences.

“The fines imposed by the court under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act being mandatory fines were properly imposed,” the judge ruled.

She explained that the law allows additional mandatory fines based on the financial benefit obtained from an offence or the loss suffered as a result of the criminal conduct.

Waititu had challenged the fines and custodial sentences imposed on him, arguing that the default imprisonment terms were unlawful.

His co-accused also contested the computation and legality of their penalties.

However, Justice Ougo said an appellate court could interfere with a sentence only in specific circumstances, including where it was illegal, based on erroneous legal principles or manifestly excessive or inadequate.

“The appeals against conviction and sentence by the first, second and third appellants on counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 are dismissed,” she ruled.

Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter

On the money laundering charges, she said the matter had to return to the Chief Magistrate's Court because the High Court was not exercising original sentencing jurisdiction over those counts.

“The acquittals are set aside,” Justice Ougo ruled, before entering convictions against the accused persons on the respective money laundering counts.

The sentences imposed on the money laundering counts will run concurrently with the sentences already imposed under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act.