Kilifi Court rules it has jurisdiction in Ksh.32M fraud case involving Italians

A Kilifi law court has surprised two Italians accused in a Ksh.32 million fraud case after ruling that it has jurisdiction to hear and determine the case.

The pair, Daniel Lo Coco and Massimo Naviti, are accused of defrauding fellow Italians by pretending to sell them houses in Watamu, Kilifi County.

They were charged with jointly obtaining Ksh.17 million from one Rita Nappo, on diverse dates between August 30, 2018, and August 1, 2019, with the intent to defraud her by pretending that they were in a position to sublease a villa, located on a plot measuring approximately 0.327 hectares—a fact they knew to be false.

They were also charged with fraudulently obtaining Ksh.15 million from Girola Fiorenzo on various dates between March 21, 2020, and February 24, 2021, in Watamu, with the intent to defraud her by pretending they were in a position to sublease another villa.

The suspects, through their lawyer Kinyua Kamundi, had filed an application seeking to have the case struck out, arguing that the alleged offences took place near Malindi Law Courts and far from Kilifi Law Courts.

Kamundi had also applied for the return of his clients’ passports, which had been confiscated by the courts so that they could not escape to Italy.

While delivering his ruling, Kilifi Chief Magistrate James Mwaniki argued that the court had jurisdiction to hear the matter, stating that the question of the location of the offence did not arise.

"In regard to the geographical jurisdiction of the courts, there is no clearly demarcated boundary, and they seem to take into account political boundaries, which may result in overlapping jurisdiction. In this case, the alleged offences occurred within Kilifi County," the judge ruled.

"It is evident, especially from the copy of the first charge sheet, that the accused persons had either been summoned or arrested and placed in custody at Kilifi Police Station to enable them to appear before this court to answer to the present charges. This court thus has territorial jurisdiction to hear the case."

Kamundi, however, protested the verdict, arguing that the case was being delayed after the third witness failed to appear in court, while the prosecuting counsel also failed to attend. 

The hearing date for the third witness had been set for February 3, 2025.