Former acting CEO of the National Water Harvesting and Storage Authority Geoffrey Sang is free to resume office.
This is despite being arrested and charged in court over a 231 million scam.
The law says that state officers are supposed to step aside and vacate office once they take plea.
However, Sang is a lucky man since the DCI who arrested and charged him, has not indicated if he will appeal the ruling that was in favor of the DPP.
Sang was arrested in April.
The arrest caused a standoff between the DCI Director George Kinoti and DPP Nordin Haji after they jostled over Sang’s corruption case.
The DPP ordered that a file on the investigations into claims of graft at NWHSA be taken to his office.
This was after DCI officers charged Sang and his accomplices before getting approval from the ODPP.
Officials from the ODPP refused to approve the charges until the file is handed to their office for action.
The DCI said Sang and the HR boss are said to have, on February 28, facilitated the appointment of Lydia K Korir, a Procurement Assistant, to the Head of Procurement without following the HR management policies of the Authority.
Also presented in court in April were, Aseno, the Authority’s senior security officer who was also charged with abuse of office.
It is alleged he allowed Nixon Kiprotich Bett, Noah Nondin arap Too and Mutai Peter Kibett access to the CEO’s office to obtain documents and electronic data of the Authority.
The tender was closed on February 12, 2020 and was awarded to J&K Investment Kenya Ltd at a cost of Sh231,114,402.64.
It was signed by Robert Kithinji on behalf of the contractor on March 26, and the NWHSA was represented by David Gitau, the Authority’s chief engineer in charge of construction, in April 20, last year.
The relief to Sang means he can also apply for the position of CEO that was advertised recently.
Candidates are supposed have submitted their applications by end of 22nd July.
On Thursday, the Court ruled that the DCI has no power to institute criminal proceedings unless the DPP gives consent.
Justice George Odunga on Thursday ruled that only the DPP has powers to charge and prosecute.
“A declaration that the 2nd Respondent, the Director of Criminal Investigations has no power and Authority to institute criminal proceedings before a Court of law without the prior consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions and any proceedings so commenced are unconstitutional, illegal, unlawful, null and void ab initio,” the judge ruled.
Judge Odunga faulted the DCI for arresting Sang without a warrant of arrest.
“Actions of the DCI proceeding to arrest the Petitioner on the 24th April 2020 without any warrant of arrest and proceed to interrogate or question him without issuing him with any summons or formally informing him of the nature of allegations he is being investigated against contrary to the practice and or precedent adopted by them when conducting investigation of other suspects was discriminatory and violated his right to equality and freedom from discrimination as stipulated in Article 27 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010,” the judge said.
The court further held that the searching and confiscating of the Sang’s mobile phones and laptop to date without a court order or search warrant violates his right to privacy and property as envisaged at Articles 31 and 40 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
Sang had told court that his arrest by officers of the DCI, his interrogation and subsequent decision to charge him with the offence of abuse of office was maliciously instigated by individuals at the Authority who are colluding with officials of the DCI to have him take a plea as a public officer so that he steps aside and he be removed from office for their preferred candidate to be appointed.
The judge ruled that Sang can resume his position at the Authority due the nullity of the charges.
“Accordingly, the said action by the DCI can no longer be a basis for the removal of the Petitioner from his position,” he ruled.
Judge Odunga held that based on the material placed before court, there is no basis upon which he found that the removal of Sang or threat of his removal from his position was informed by the subject criminal proceedings.