Court ruling on missing witness boost for corruption war

A judge has ruled that it is not mandatory for the prosecution to present all key witnesses to prove a corruption case.

Lady Justice Mumbi Ngugi’s decision is a huge boost to the fight against corruption especially after the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission and the Director of Public Prosecutions lost several graft cases on the basis that the testimony of crucial witnesses was missing.

Justice Ngugi said a corruption case can be determined so long as other witnesses and evidence tabled in court directly link the accused to the fraud.

“What matters is the evidence submitted in court to support the corruption case and not the crucial witnesses. There is no basis of drawing an adverse inference of mistrial from the prosecution’s failure to call a key witness when other witnesses have tabled enough evidence."

Her decision means that the prosecution can decide to limit the number of witnesses in a case when they are satisfied that the ones they have presented to court have given sufficient evidence.

Justice Ngugi made the decision in a case where Lucy Wangui, a public health officer attached to Nairobi City County, had appealed against an 18-month jail sentence for soliciting and receiving a Sh20,000 bribe from businessman Mathew Kabau.

Wangui, who was arrested in a sting operation involving the anti-corruption agency, had argued that a woman identified as Wanjiku, who had witnessed everything that had taken place, was not called to testify in court.

“It was not necessary to call the witness even if she was a crucial one since the evidence was adequate and it proved the case against the accused,” the judge ruled.