By Eric Winston/Guest Writer
Kapsaret MP Oscar Sudi suffered a double legal tragedy after a Nairobi court rejected his request to quash a criminal trial in which he is charged with forging his academic documents on one hand, while on other, refused to temporarily suspend the trial pending an appeal.
High court anti-corruption judge Hedwig Ong’udi said the request to quash the criminal charge was devoid of merit and therefore stood dismissed.
The Kapsaret MP had moved to the high court seeking to stop a magistrate’s court from hearing the forgery case saying that EACC did not have investigative powers to investigate a criminal conduct and that the investigations were an invasion of his right to privacy.
Right to privacy
The judge said Oscar Sudi failed to prove how his right to privacy had been violated by being investigated.
“The evidence provided by Oscar Sudi on how his right to privacy was violated does not meet the threshold needed… besides, not all rights are absolute,” the judge said in her ruling.
“The petitioner (Oscar Sudi) volunteered information to the institutions believing that he satisfied the requirements of Chapter 6 of the Constitution… he knew that his conduct both in private and in public is of public interest,” justice Hedwig Ong’udi said.
On whether the EACC had powers to investigate him, the judge told Sudi that the institution can initiate investigations on their own will or from a complaint from a member of the public.
“The court will be hesitant to curtail the powers of institutions which they are entrusted by the Constitution,” Judge Ong’udi said.
The institutions that investigated the Kapsaret MP and pressed criminal charges against him were merely enforcing the provisions of the law, the judge added, saying that the court cannot direct the Director of Public Prosecutions on what and what not to charge an individual with.
Oscar Sudi’s defence team then sought to be granted a temporary stop against the case as they intended to appeal the high court ruling, a request the judge told them could only be granted by the Court of Appeal in which they intended to lodge the appeal.