- Rashmi and Deepak Kamani claim that Jacques Rayroud, the swiss prosecutor, has given a vague certificate.
- The case is at its tail end with the only remaining witness being the investigating officer.
Image: FILE
Suspects implicated in the Sh3.5 billion Anglo Leasing case have contested documentary evidence obtained from Switzerland, saying due process was not followed.
Rashmi and Deepak Kamani claim that Jacques Rayroud, the swiss prosecutor, has given a vague certificate and not a witness statement on the transmission of the documents obtained through the Mutual Legal Assistance.
"It is impossible to ascertain the exact documents he is referring to without him testifying on the same. For instance, he refers to a compact disk with evidence without specifying or stating the exact documents contained in it,” they say.
"The Kamanis claim there is a possibility that the documents could have been manipulated and if the state intends to produce them, it is only Rayroud who can produce the documents that originated from him.
The accused are opposed to the admission of several documents on the grounds that they are uncertified copies and did not comply with the MLA procedure.
Some of the documents are payment vouchers, internal memos from former PS Dave Mwangi to former Minister Chris Murungaru, letters from PS Finance to the Attorney General, and other documents from the Commissioner of Police to PS National Security.
The case is at its tail end with the only remaining witness being the investigating officer. Ignatius Wekesa has since given part of his testimony but he is yet to conclude it.
During prior hearing dates, Wekesa told the court that they were not able to trace a mysterious foreigner who allegedly executed the Anglo Leasing contract that led to the loss of billions of shillings.
He said that documents in relation to the project were always being signed by one Brian Mills but to date, they have never been able to locate him.
On Tuesday, Wekesa began to adduce certain documents which are crucial to the prosecution's case against the Kamanis and the other accused persons.
But the defence, through lawyer Ahmednasir Abdulahi and Edward Oonge, has objected to their production on grounds that documents obtained from MLA from Switzerland did not comply with the procedure set down under the MLA Act.
They also argue that the documents are obtained through the power of attorney issued by "an incompetent authority—the defunct Kenya Anti Corruption Authority".
It's their argument that Section 7 of the MLA Act provides that a request from Kenya needs to be made by a competent authority.
The Kamanis argue that the MLA process commenced by the state was not through diplomatic channels. They say former attorneys general Githu Muigai and Amos Wako, who testified in the matter, did not produce any letter evidencing that MLA from Switzerland was obtained through diplomatic channels.
"Rather, the state opted to appoint a legal counsel contracted to allegedly obtain the documents on its behalf contrary to well-known procedure and practice,” they say.
"We stand to suffer great prejudice if the documents received under MLA from Switzerland are admitted in court. The sole witnesses who allege to have obtained the same have conflicting narratives on how the documents were transmitted to Kenya.”
In the case, the Kamanis alongside the late Finance Minister David Mwiraria, former Permanent Secretaries David Mwangi and Joseph Magari, David Onyonka, Sound Day Corporation and Apex Finance are accused of committing an economic crime.
It is alleged that between October 30, 2003, and April 14, 2004, in Nairobi, they conspired with others to engage in a scheme to defraud the government of Sh3.5 billion through a suppliers credit contract agreement for the modernisation of the Police Security Equipment and Accessories Project.