Sentence on Kenyans too harsh, say Sudan judges

Relatives of the Kenyans jailed in South Sudan accompanied by human rights activists hold vigil at Foreign Affairs Harambee House in March 2017. Four Kenyan were sentenced to life imprisonment by High Court of South Sudan after being charged with financial fraud in 2016. [File, Standard]

South Sudan’s top most judges have questioned the rationale behind jailing four Kenyans convicted of simple fraud for life.

In their decision delivered two weeks ago and received by the families of Ravi Ghaghda, Anthony Mwadime, Anthony Keya and Boniface Muriuki, three appellate judges separately censured their juniors for imposing unreasonably harsh sentence on the accused.

The four Kenyans were part of a larger team comprising 12 South Sudanese arrested in connection with alleged fraud in Office of the President of South Sudan involving fake letters, forged seals and stamps recovered from a Juba-based firm the four worked for.

Although the judges agree that the charges against them were proven, they separately mused on the absurdity of the long sentences.

“The sentence is a bit harsh and excessive in the circumstances of this case,” Justice Kukurlopita Marino Pitia, the President of the Court of Appeal of Greater Equitoria Circuit-Juba says.

Overcrowded prisons

In his 47-page opinion, the judge pointed out: “This Court of Appeal takes judicial notice that Juba Federal Prison or any other prison in South Sudan. Their conditions are not conducive, they are overcrowded ....”

Accordingly, he reduced their sentences to 12 years and significantly reduced the heavy collegiate fine imposed on them.

Justice Stephen Simon Bengingwa was even more brazen in his critique of trial court’s which jailed the quartet for life. In first instance, the judge took over from where his colleague left and further knocked off the fines imposed on group.

Second, the judge deplored the failure by the trial judge to discuss the ingredients of every offence against the available evidence.

“The trial judge in this case discussed the case generally without discussing the ingredients of the offences in relation to the evidence provided, the accused were convicted generally without specifying acts or role of each accused in commission of the crime and the intention.” he said.

Clarify

Other defects in the judgment pointed out by the judge include failures to separate imprisonment terms and fines for each of the accused, clarify whether the sentences for the various crimes would run consecutively or concurrently and to indicate when the sentences would commence.

He also took issue with failure of the court to stamp its authority against national security officers who threatened defense lawyers inside the courtroom.

“This amounts to interference of the judiciary. The trial judge should not have allowed it,” the judge said.

To this particular judge, the judgment issued was so “defective” that the only remedy was to quash it and order a retrial.

Judge Isaac Pur Majok Reen faulted the judge for convicting the accused and sentencing them “equally and jointly for life imprisonment without enough reasoning. His verdict was simple — quash the sentence and order a retrial.

Meanwhile, the families of the victims continue to hang on to hope.

“This is our last thread of hope that our brothers will come back soon. We have tried everything else at our level and failed. We hope during the retrial our lawyers will turn the tide and secure their freedom,” Tejal Ghaghda, sister of Ravi told Sunday Standard.