Court rules that the petitioners did not demonstrate that investigations by the EACC were conducted unlawfully.
The High Court has dismissed a petition by a Turkana County government accountant and her business partner to block their arrest on allegations of corruption. The allegations relate to the Sh24.9 million that had been allocated for the supply of corn-soya blend supplements for malnutrition programmes.
Justice Chacha Mwita ruled that the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had not violated the Constitutional rights of Ms Esther Lokai Elim and Mr Elim Peter Epagan by investigating their alleged links to Amailo Investment Company Limited.
The firm is accused of receiving payment from the county government without delivering the contracted goods.
The dispute stems from a March 2021 framework agreement between Turkana County and Amailo Investment Company Limited for the supply of UNIMIX corn-soya blend—a nutritional supplement critical for combating malnutrition in the drought-stricken region.
According to EACC, the county paid Sh24.9 million for 6,024 bags (25kg each), but the company allegedly failed to deliver.
The EACC says that Ms Elim, an accountant at the county government, was previously a director of Amailo Investment and allegedly used her relatives to trade with the devolved unit during former Governor Josphat Nanok’s tenure (2014–2022).
Despite resigning as directors in 2019—two years before the award of the contested tender—the petitioners allegedly retained control over the company’s bank account while relatives assumed directorship, raising suspicions of disguised ownership.
In their petition, Ms Elim and Mr Epagan argued that their resignation severed any connection to the company’s dealings and accused the EACC and the DPP of malicious intended prosecution.
They claimed that the continued threats of arrest infringed on their rights to liberty, security, and freedom of movement.
Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission's (EACC) North Rift Regional offices. The High Court has dismissed a petition by a Turkana County government accountant and her business partner to block their arrest on allegations of corruption.
However, Justice Mwita found their arguments insufficient as there was no proof that the EACC and the DPP had breached the petitioners' rights or fundamental freedoms.
The judge noted that the petitioners’ complaint related to EACC investigations and possible arrest and prosecution.
"There cannot be allegations of violation of rights merely because investigative agencies are discharging their constitutional mandates," he stated.
The judge emphasised that the petitioners failed to prove misconduct and rights violation by the EACC or DPP.
The court said the petitioners did not demonstrate that investigations were conducted unlawfully.
Justice Mwita also cited a premature legal challenge stating that since no charges had been filed, halting investigations would interfere with the agencies’ statutory duties.
On the petitioners' contention that they were no longer directors of the company and had no beneficial ownership, the court deferred the question of whether the petitioners still controlled Amailo Investment to a potential trial, should charges be brought.
The EACC, in response, maintained that the directorship changes were a façade. It alleges that Ms Elim violated Section 42(3) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act by trading with her employer through proxies.
The commission also cited the petitioners’ continued access to the company’s Equity Bank account as evidence of their involvement.
"Investigations into the petitioners’ criminal culpability is therefore not illegal or an abuse of the criminal justice system. Investigations were not being conducted for an ulterior motive," said EACC.
It added that there were no exceptional circumstances that would warrant the court's intervention.
Court rules that the petitioners did not demonstrate that investigations by the EACC were conducted unlawfully.
The ruling reinforces the judiciary’s stance against obstructing corruption investigations, particularly where public funds are involved.
The court stressed that individual rights must be balanced against public interest, especially in cases affecting vulnerable populations, such as the Turkana malnutrition programmes.
The DPP supported this position, arguing that constitutional rights are not absolute and must be weighed against societal welfare.
With the petition dismissed, the EACC is free to proceed with investigations, potentially leading to arrests and prosecution.
The case highlights ongoing challenges in combating graft within county governments, particularly where public officials are accused of exploiting procurement systems.
