A company implicated in the Sh3.5 billion Anglo Leasing scandal did not have the technical and financial capability to supply police security equipment, a Nairobi court heard on Tuesday.
Investigating officer John Kiilu told magistrate Martha Mutuku that their probe established that the accounts of Info Talent were nil at the time the first instalment for the contract was made.
“Interestingly a commitment fee of Sh226 million was the first instalment to the bank account of Info talent. Prior to that, its account was nil until this first payment was made which now questions whether it had the capability to finance a project of such magnitude when its account was nil,” Kiilu said.
He said the contract was unenforceable as there was no budgetary allocation for it.
The court heard the only amount available for security equipment for that financial year was Sh20 million, yet the contract was worth Sh5.5 billion.
“Government officials were engaging the state in a project that was not budgeted. As at the time public officers were signing the contract they were not aware who they were signing the contract with, even the address of the company involved in the contract,” he said.
In the case, former permanent secretaries Joseph Magari, Dave Mwangi and David Onyonka and businessmen Deepak and Rashmi Kamani, together with their father Rasmi Chamanlal have denied conspiring to defraud the government of over Sh3.5 billion. The charges relate to security tenders that the government has since termed irregular.
Kiilu in his testimony also took the court through a letter dated July 11, 2003 from the then PS Mwangi to the Commissioner of Police Edwin Nyaseda over the project.
The letter aallegedly asked Nyaseda whether the police required the services stated in a proposal for the equipment.
“The letter was contrary to the laid down procedures on procurement laws. It should have been the user department writing to the PS. In this case, it was the other way round. It is the PS writing to the user department inquiring whether they need those services,” Kiilu said.
The court also heard that it was not clear where the company that is at the centre of the scandal was domiciled as investigations established that it was not registered in Switzerland.
Edited by P.O
