The DPP will appeal the decision to block Mwilu’s charges/FILE
NAIROBI, Kenya, May 31 – Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu is not off the hook yet despite successfully challenging planned charges over graft accusations.
Director of Public Prosecutions Noordin Haji on Friday said the State will file a complaint to the Judicial Service Commission over her conduct as well as petition the five-judge bench ruling at the Court of Appeal.
Addressing journalists, the DPP faulted the ruling saying all the evidence acquired against the top judge were acquired legally including a court order to execute the same, which he said was issued at the Milimani Law Courts.
In the ruling, the court questioned how Director of Criminal Investigations George Kinoti obtained evidence regarding her bank accounts at the Imperial Bank but in a rejoinder, the DPP said the prosecution was not given a chance to expound on it during hearing of the petition.
“The matter was not raised in a substantive application and canvassed in court,” the DPP said.
The DCJ is facing 13 counts, seven of which related to failing to pay Sh12 million stamp duty to the Kenya Revenue Authority, an offence that allegedly happened between 2013 and 2016.
“We went through the right way. However, this matter was not in the pleadings before the court. If it was, we would have done that,” he said.
He said they are ready to prove before the Court of Appeal that all evidence against DCJ Mwilu was rightly acquired.
“We expected this and we were prepared,” DPP Haji asserted, revealing the appeal will be made next week.
The judges also ruled that for the charge of abuse of office, the DCI should have notified the Judicial Service Commission in the first instance.
“To allow such misconduct against a judicial officer without initial recourse to the JSC would expose judges or judicial officers to harassment by the Executive and police.”
In their ruling, the judges further declined to acknowledge that Mwilu was charged as a result of President Uhuru Kenyatta’s remark after the annulment of his win during the 2017 General Election, where he said “we shall revisit.”
They said it wasn’t in the place of court to determine what President Kenyatta meant but noted that the statement cannot be entirely ignored because of the office he holds.
The court cautioned that the President’s comments can be taken out of context “for one to achieve what they want.”
The DCI and DPP were found to have acted without external influence.
About The Author
