The Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court’s decision that upheld the sentencing of Sirisia MP John Waluke to 67 years in prison with an alternative fine of Ksh. 1 billion over a maize importation scam.
In its ruling on Friday, the appellate court stated that the High Court failed to provide the proper context for the evidence before it. Justices Asike Makhanda and Patrick Kiage, in their majority judgment, said the High Court’s analysis of the evidence was insufficient, leading to an incorrect conclusion.
“The framing of the issues for determination fell short of proper analysis and contextualization of the evidence. The fresh analysis was not based on the particular elements of the offences charged and was flippant, or perfunctory, to say the least,” ruled the Court of Appeal.
The court further criticized the High Court Judge Esther Maina for concentrating solely on the invoice related to the first charge of forgery, which Waluke was convicted for, to acquire public funds. The appellate court ruled this approach was flawed.
“If at all, the learned judge merely concentrated on the invoice, which was the basis of the first charge and, according to it, formed the circumstances of all other charges. To our minds, this was a wrong approach,” the ruling added.
The Court of Appeal also pointed out that the High Court did not independently examine the other charges, even though they had different elements and involved various actors, which required a distinct evaluation separate from the first charge.
“We find this conflated and conglomerate conclusion too broad as the facts were different, based on each appellant. This underlines a failure to subject the evidence to fresh scrutiny. We are satisfied that had the judge analyzed the evidence on record properly, she would have come to a different conclusion as to the criminal culpability of the appellants,” the court concluded.
