The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission has asked a Nairobi court to dismiss an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions to drop corruption charges against former Migori governor Okoth Obado and his co-accused, arguing that the request fails to follow legal requirements and ignores public interest.
In its court submissions, the commission said plea agreements are meant to streamline cases where there is a clear admission of guilt, not simply to end a trial.
The EACC argued that the DPP’s reliance on section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code as the basis for terminating the case was a misinterpretation of the law.
The commission explained that plea negotiations under the code require the accused to admit guilt, after which the court delivers judgment and sentencing.
It said the DPP’s plan to halt the case, citing Mr Obado’s surrender of assets linked to the alleged crimes, was therefore legally flawed.
The anti-graft body warned that the proposed agreement falls short of public interest standards and could send the wrong message to the public, suggesting that serious corruption can be resolved through leniency rather than accountability.
It added that negotiations between the DPP, the EACC, and the accused collapsed because they did not comply with legal procedures.
The commission also emphasized that while civil recovery of assets can be considered during sentencing under section 1371(2)(d), it cannot replace an actual admission of criminal liability.
Obado and his children—Dan Achola Okoth, Susan Scarlet Akoth, Jerry Zachary, and Evelyne Adhiambo—face charges of conspiracy to commit economic crime and money laundering, alongside several associates and companies.
The plea agreement follows a June 2024 deal in which Obado surrendered eight properties and two vehicles valued at Sh235.6 million to the state, exceeding what the commission had initially sought.
Obado maintains that section 87 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows the DPP to withdraw charges and argued that the forfeited assets addressed claims in related civil suits.
The court is expected to issue its ruling on March 27.
