Mr Gachagua is still campaigning to become William Ruto’s deputy president if they win the election slated for August 9th. Justice Esther Maina ruled that the Mathira MP, who is also DP William Ruto’s running mate had admitted to the court that he had received the funds from various government institutions but there was no evidence that he supplied or rendered any services to the government
The consequences of last week’s High Court ruling against DP William Ruto’s running mate Rigathi Gachagua to forfeit Khs. 200 million to the State, would have automatically disqualified him from contesting for any public office in the land, but Kenya being what it is, anything goes.
Mr Gachagua is still campaigning to become William Ruto’s deputy president if they win the election slated for August 9th. Justice Esther Maina ruled that the Mathira MP, who is also DP William Ruto’s running mate had admitted to the court that he had received the funds from various government institutions but there was no evidence that he supplied or rendered any services to the government.
Rigathi Gachagua lost the Khs. 200 million to the State after the High Court ruled that the money held in his various bank accounts and at Rafiki Microfinance were proceeds of corruption. In any modern democracy, the Mathira legislator would have resigned from his current quest as possible future Deputy President of Kenya. Legally, the ruling would have brought an end to his political career, and any company associated with him would have been barred from conducting businesses with government or state corporations and institutions.
In her ruling Justice Maina declared: “I have carefully considered the evidence on record including affidavits, annexures and submissions by all parties and I am satisfied that the funds are liable for forfeiture to the government.” Justice Maina said the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) had proved beyond reasonable that the MP and his companies benefited from funds yet did not deliver any goods or provided any services to the ministries or agencies, which gave tenders to him.
She said in her ruling that Mr Gachagua had failed to produce any documentary evidence, witnesses or prove otherwise that he had a contractual agreement to deliver specific goods and services. Interestingly early this month, during one of his campaign rallies MR Gachaagua went vocal declaring that as soon as he and William Ruto formed government, he would ensure that an order freezing his bank accounts is immediately lifted Executive Orders.
Mr Gachagua condemned the High courts’ decision. He declared that he will contest the ruling in the Court of Appeal, which means business as usual until when the matter is heard and determined. Mr Gachagua is quoted by a section of the media saying, “The Judge was biased against us from the word go, she threw caution to the wind by conducting a sham trial against the rules of evidence, refused our application to cross-examine the Investigator to test the veracity of his allegations,” adding that Justice Maina ruled that all evidence should be through affidavits and rejected oral evidence.
There’s no story that cannot be told. We cover the stories that others don’t want to be told, we bring you all the news you need. If you have tips, exposes or any story you need to be told bluntly and all queries write to us [email protected] also find us on twitter.