HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 40220,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/40220/?format=api",
"text_counter": 422,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Abdikadir",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 1,
"legal_name": "Abdikadir Hussein Mohamed",
"slug": "abdikadir-mohammed"
},
"content": "judicial experience, we agreed that she lacks judicial experience, but that was not a bar to her holding this post. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with respect to the nominee for the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), the queries were in four broad areas and I want to go through them. One, there were allegations dealing with four cases that this gentleman either handled or was accused of interfering or conflict of interest. Two, the CKRC and his relationship with the former Chairman of the CKRC, Prof. Yash Pal Ghai. Three, were very strange allegations that came to the Committee through the former Permanent Secretary, Mr. Kirui. Four, on his past performance in that post and in that department and whether they were a clear show that he was not fit to hold this position. On the cases, and I want to refer to each one of them, the first two come from a complaint that was raised by Justice ole Keiwua to the Attorney-General some time back concerning a very protracted and long standing dispute over some property in the Maasai Mara. This was a very protracted long standing dispute, but the issues as far as this nominee is concerned, relate to two issues; one, that one of the protagonists in that duo, Livingstone Ole Ntutu, was a former client of the nominee when the nominee was in private practice. A case was filed against this gentleman when the nominee had moved from private practice and was in the Department of Prosecutions as the Director of Public Prosecutions. The allegation is that he used his position to help his former client in this prosecution. The second allegation, as far as that particular letter is concerned, relates to the Chief Magistrates Criminal Case No.2157 of 2003. The succession case is a Succession Case No.1263 of 2000 which deals with certification. This is a succession cause. Somebody died and somebody wanted to get letters of administration of the estate of a deceased gentleman. The allegation is that in certifying a list of the beneficiaries for that deceased personâs estate, the nominee certified as genuine the identity card that allegedly belonged to a six year old minor. The third case deals with Anglo Leasing and it is the case of the Republic versus Zakayo Cheruiyot. The allegation was that the nominee was an advocate for Mr. Cheruiyot before he became the DPP and when he came to the position of the DPP, he may have acted improperly as far as that case is concerned. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with respect to those issues, the Committee puts direct questions on the following matters: First of all, these allegations first came in a non-signed document that was brought by a civil society organization. The Committee was willing to take up because of the importance of this position and the importance with which we held this issue. In normal circumstances, even in this House, we would not have accepted unsigned documents to have been taken in on a serious issue, but in view of the seriousness of this matter and the short timelines, we wanted to take it up. Fortunately, by the time we were seeking further clarification the next day, that letter had been signed by, we were informed, the advocate of Justice ole Keiwua. On the issue of ole Ntutu, the nomineeâs answer was that, first of all, the process to prosecute Livingstone ole Ntutu was started when he was there. In other words, he was head of department when the decision to prosecute ole Ntutu was made. Therefore, if he wanted not to prosecute him, he would not have started that prosecution if that allegation was correct. Secondly, that he was not the one handling the prosecution and that there was a prosecutor who was handling it independent of him. Thirdly, that when the letter came, the Attorney-General asked for a report from that other prosecutor, who indicated that this gentleman had not in any way interfered with him and that the allegation that he had refused to call witnesses were incorrect. That he had looked for witnesses and they were not available. Finally, that this"
}