In a letter dated August 8, EACC’s Upper Eastern Regional Manager, Mogare Oira, said the disappearance of the money that was to be used as an exhibit had weakened the case.
The letter asked ODPP to reconsider continuing with the trial against a judicial officer based in Chuka.
The officer had been facing two bribery charges under the Bribery Act of 2016. Five witnesses had already testified in court.
However, when the fifth witness was called, the cash evidence — Ksh50,000 allegedly used in the transaction — could not be produced.
This development dealt a huge blow to the case, as the cash was central to proving the allegations.
EACC admitted that the chain of custody for the missing money had been compromised, creating doubts over how the evidence was handled.
“Because of discrepancies in possession of the exhibit, the credibility of the case is at risk. The accused could easily challenge this in court,” the letter stated.
With the exhibit missing, the agency warned that the case would likely collapse, possibly embarrassing both the prosecution and the commission.
Under Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the prosecution has the power to withdraw a case before judgment, as long as the court agrees.
Some of the reasons for dropping a case include missing exhibits, lack of evidence, failure to get witnesses, or even public interest considerations.
So far, ODPP has not given a response to the EACC’s request.
The disappearance of the cash exhibit has now raised concerns over how evidence is stored and safeguarded in corruption cases.
Legal experts warn that such lapses could undermine the fight against graft and give suspects room to escape accountability.
The EACC, headquartered at Integrity Centre in Nairobi, has promised to review its procedures to avoid similar setbacks in the future.

0 Comments