EACC, DPP clash over withdrawal of graft case against Oparanya

The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) has read mischief into the decision by the Director of Public Prosecution Renson Ingonga to review an earlier decision to prosecute former Kakamega Governor and now Cabinet nominee Wycliffe Oparanya for conflict of interest and receipt of irregular benefits.

EACC in a statement to the DPP on Wednesday rejected the DPP's proposal and maintained that the letter by the ODPP was written after Oparanya's nomination.

DPP had written to EACC withdrawing consent to prosecute Oparanya after his nomination by President William Ruto as Cooperatives and MSMEs development Cabinet Secretary.

The letter by the ODPP is dated 8th July but EACC acknowledges receipt on the 25th July 2024.

EACC is taking issue with the grounds on which the DPP has based his decision not to move ahead with Oparanya's prosecution.

“The Commission is of the strong view that the evidence obtained, and availed to your Office, is cogent enough and meets the necessary threshold of proof beyond any reasonable doubt. In view of the foregoing, the Commission reiterates its earlier recommendation to charge ALL the suspects as communicated vide our letter dated December 4 2023 and concurred with by yourself in a letter dated December 18 2023,” EACC CEO Twalib Mbaraka stated.

On Thursday, Oparanya's lawyers accused the EACC of ‘manifest malice’ for failing to clear Oparanya ahead of his approval hearing scheduled for Sunday.

EACC had advised the National Assembly Clerk, “The Commission submitted a report to the DPP recommending prosecution of the nominee on various charges including conspiracy to commit an offence of corruption, conflict of interest, abuse of office and money laundering.”

But on July 8, 2024, the DPP reviewed his decision to charge supposedly on receiving a letter from Oparanya's advocates, making the case that the monies Oparanya received from those who had secured payment for tenders when he was governor were not, in fact, kickbacks but a loan; one which he had been sued over for failure to pay.

The DPP wrote to the Commission saying, “Most of the charges proposed were premised on monies paid by the Director of Sabema International Ltd and Sesela Resources Ltd one Joseph Obulunji Okutoyi (E5) to the firm of Marende & Nyaundi Company Advocates (Hon. Wycliffe Oparanya's advocate) to enable Mr. Cparanya purchase a house in LR No.10034 located at Forest Edge Green Villas in Karen.”

“It has since been established that the monies alleged to have been money laundered was a loan.”

The DPP added, “The Director of Public Prosecutions finds that it will be an uphill task to secure a conviction in this matter and has reviewed the decision to charge all the suspects in the matter and directed that the file be closed for lack of sufficient evidence.”

The EACC has however stuck to its guns holding firm that, “POCAMLA defines "Proceeds of crime" as any economic advantage derived directly or indirectly as a result or in connection with an offence, irrespective of the identity of the offender.

In this case, conflict of interest is an offence under Section 42 of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. It is instructive to note that the courts have held that it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove a predicate offence before charging for money laundering."

While ultimately the decision to charge rests with the DPP, the EACC in publicly calling out the Office of the DPP has effectively challenged this regime's commitment to rooting out corruption in government even when it may not be politically expedient.