By ADEN KIPRUTO
The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) clashed for the third time in court over the proposed withdrawal of the Sh505 million corruption case against former Migori Governor Okoth Obado, his four children, and several associates.
The EACC accused the DPP of sidelining it in secret plea-bargain negotiations aimed at terminating the high-profile case, despite earlier court orders requiring all parties to be involved in the process.
Appearing before Milimani Anti-Corruption Court Magistrate Charles Ondieki, EACC lawyer Mary Ng’ang’a said that although the accused had written to the DPP seeking Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), the commission was deliberately excluded from the final stages of the talks.
She told the court that in its response dated May 19, 2025, the EACC indicated it was not opposed to negotiations but insisted on a structured framework under Sections 137A to 137O of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).
Ng’ang’a said EACC attended several meetings convened by the DPP, the last being on August 28, 2025. However, during that session, the commission was informed that a plea bargain had already been finalized and was pending signature.
“We were told the matter was to be withdrawn under Section 137(1)(d) and Section 87(a) of the CPC. When we asked to peruse the agreement before signing, we were denied access to a copy,” she stated.
The commission said it was shocked to be informed that the case was “unique” and did not require investigators’ involvement in negotiations. Ng’ang’a added that EACC officials were later asked to leave the meeting and have never seen the agreement.
The agency argued that the proposed mode of withdrawal was legally flawed and amounted to an abuse of the court process.
According to the EACC, the plea bargain invoked Section 137 of the CPC, while simultaneously stating that the charges would be withdrawn under Section 87(a), creating a legal conflict.
“You cannot sneak in a withdrawal through plea negotiations when the law requires a formal application with the court’s leave,” EACC argued.
The commission also dismissed attempts to link the criminal trial with earlier civil forfeiture suits settled in the High Court, saying the civil matters were independent and could not be used to justify withdrawal of the criminal charges.
The DPP, through State Counsel Nora, however, insisted that a valid plea-bargain agreement had been signed between the prosecution and all the accused persons. She urged the court to adopt it, saying it followed extensive discussions and was reached voluntarily to allow an efficient conclusion of the matter.
Nora added that the accused had previously forfeited assets worth Sh235.6 million to the government, including motor vehicles, residential properties in Nairobi and Migori, and commercial buildings, as part of settlements in High Court cases involving assets valued at Sh1.9 billion and Sh75 million.
But the EACC strongly disputed the DPP’s presentation of facts, saying the civil settlements did not address all the criminal counts. In particular, the commission pointed to Count 12 of the charge sheet, which involves a Sh256,730,688 money-laundering transaction that was not part of the forfeiture agreements.
EACC insisted that the criminal case should proceed to full trial, arguing that the plea bargain excluded them and failed to address serious allegations.
Obado, his children, and the co-accused all confirmed in court that they supported the plea-bargain agreement, with the former governor saying he understood its consequences and entered it voluntarily.
Obado and his children—Dan Achola Okoth, Susan Scarlet Akoth, Jerry Zachary, and Evelyne Adhiambo—are charged with conspiracy to commit economic crimes and money laundering alongside their associates and their companies.
The case, filed in 2018, has only one prosecution witness so far—the investigating officer.
Magistrate Ondieki granted the EACC and the DPP 14 days to file written submissions and gave the defence seven days. The case will be mentioned on January 21, 2026.
