Wako faulted for leaving out Awori in corruption case

ANTHONY OMUYA | NATION
Retired Attorney-General Amos Wako (rights) leaves the Nairobi High Court on December 08, 2011 after testifying during the hearing of a case against four people charged with abuse of office in relation to the Anglo-Leasing scandal.

What you need to know:

  • Lawyers demand to know why four junior officers were put on trial yet they worked under the former vice-president

Former attorney-general Amos Wako was on Thursday put to task over his failure to recommend criminal charges against ex-Vice President Moody Awori over the Anglo-Leasing scandal.

Mr Wako was on a collision course with defence lawyers over his recommendation to have Sylvester Mwaliko, Joseph Magari, Wilson Sitonik and David Onyonka prosecuted.

Mr Mwaliko, Mr Magari, Mr Sitonik and Mr Onyonka are charged with abuse of office in connection to the Sh91.6 million passports tender award to Anglo-Leasing and Finance Ltd.

The lawyers said that as the person in charge of the line ministry that handled the request to have the security passports, the former VP should have been charged.

But Mr Wako defended the former VP, saying, his ministry was only to initiate a project, consult Treasury and ask for the AG’s opinion.

He said the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission investigated all people suspected to have been behind the scandal including the former VP, and would have charged him if they had evidence.

“Mr Awori gave a statement in Parliament clarifying that no money was lost in the Anglo-Leasing project after the government recovered all money,” said Mr Wako.

He said it was the Director of Public Prosecutions who drafted the charges against the four accused and he only approved their prosecution after being satisfied that there was sufficient evidence.

He added that he could not recall when the investigations started but that by the time the charges were being closed against the four accused person’s, there was no evidence linking Mr Awori to the scandal.

Asked whether he knew what the contract was all about, Mr Wako said that was a matter for Treasury to find out since his office was only to provide legal opinion.

He testified that the AG’s legal opinion could not validate an agreement, which had already been executed and it acted only as a comfort letter to the parties involved.

He denied that he was responsible for giving legal opinion approving the contract, saying he delegated the responsibility to the state counsel in charge of treaties and international agreements.

“I never handled the matter personally since it fell under my officers in the treaties and international agreements department. I only came in if the matters were of great importance and needed my personal opinion,” Mr Wako said.

He added that he was only given a copy of the promissory notes from the government to sign and that he did not draft the contents of the agreement between the government and the Anglo-Leasing company.