The Director of Public Prosecutions has defended the decision by the DCI to summon lawyer Danstan Omari over the ex-Interior CS Fred Matiang'i house raid saga.
In an affidavit filed in opposition to the case filed by Omari at the constitutional court, the DPP argues that advocate-client privilege does not extend to acts that amount to the commission of a criminal offense.
“The police in their capacity as an investigative agency is statutorily permitted to summon any person for purposes of interrogation provided there is probable cause to believe that the person concerned is possessed or seized of information that may assist them in their investigations,” the court papers read.
In the document signed by prosecuting counsel Becky Arunga dated March 3, the DPP says Omari has not demonstrated that the DCI acted without or in excess of the powers conferred upon them by the law or have infringed, violated, contravened or in any other manner failed to comply with or respect the provisions of the Constitution.
Arunga further argues that Omari has also not tabled any evidence to prove that he is or has been compelled to disclose privileged communication with his client.
“The notice he is inviting this honourable court to quash is merely an invitation to assist the 1st and 2nd respondent in providing useful information that might assist in the investigation,” court papers read.
The DPP has asked the court not to grant the prayers sought by Omari as it would deny the police their statutory and constitutional mandate to detect and investigate a suspected criminal offence to its logical conclusion.
DPP further said the orders sought by Omari are not supported by any factual or any legal foundation since it is in the public domain that he voluntarily published in electronic media the instructions given to him by his client thus his complaint is just but an afterthought.
However, the DPP has also claimed that his office was improperly enjoined in the matter because he has not been involved in any way whatsoever in the investigations that are being undertaken by the police against Omari.
Arunga said their office has taken no step against Omari in the said matter so the case against the DPP should be dismissed with costs.
The DPP is listed as the third respondent in the case while the DCI and IG are listed as the first and second respondents respectively.
The court has already issued orders in the case barring police from summoning Omari over the Matiang’i house raid pending a hearing and determination of the case.
The case will be mentioned on April 18.
