BY NT CORRESPONDENT.
Blow to Embakasi MP Babu Owino after he failed to have attempted murder charges against him dropped.
In his ruling Senior principal magistrate Bernard Ochoi declined to allow the application to withdraw charges against the legislator saying that he did not show any evidence to court on how the victim DJ evolve knowns Felix Odhiambo Orinda was compensated before the charges can be withdrawn.
“I note from the letter from the victim seeking to withdraw the case that he want the case against Owino withdrawn under section 204 of the criminal procedural code so that he can concentrate of his healing process. No evidence evidence was given to show how the complainant was compensated,”ruled the magistrate.
Ochoi further said that the MP did not come out openly to state how he intends to compensate the victim in pursuit of restorative justice.
The magistrate noted that the victim comes from a humble background and may not be in a capacity to cater for the kind of specialized treatment he requires if the charges against the MP are terminated
“An unconditional withdrawal in my view, however is not appropriate in the circumstances of this case, the parties must come out openly on what offer the accused has made while pursuing restorative justice,” he said.
The magistrate said he was not told whether any form of compensation had been made despite the serious injuries suffered by the victim.
He dismissed claims that Orinda wanted to concentrate on the healing process saying although the injury was serious, two medical reports tabled in court indicated that he was mentally sound and capable to follow court proceedings and make necessary decisions concerning his life.
“There is no indication in the two reports however that the complainant’s healing process would be affected if this case was to go on or on an indication on how he would be affected,” he said.
On the second count of behaving disorderly while carrying a firearm, the court said that the same was not personal in nature and the same can only be withdrawn by the DPP for good reasons by dint of the powers conferred to the DPP by Article 157 of the constitution.
Ochoi also said that the parties can still pursue negotiations if they wish, an unconditional withdrawal of the case was not appropriate in the case.
Owino was charged with two counts of attempted murder and behaving disorderly. The allegation is that on January 17, last year, he attempted to cause the death of Orinda by shooting him.
On the second count, he is accused of behaving disorderly while carrying a firearm. He is accused of disorderly firing one round of ammunition with intent to shoot Orinda.
In December last the court had declined to allow a similar application by parties after the DPP objected to the same and sought to have a mental assessment conducted to DJ evolve before the matter was withdraw.
Through his lawyer, Orinda and his family said they no longer wished to pursue the case and wrote a letter to the DPP, seeking to withdraw the case. The letter was signed by his parents- Johannes Orongo and Mary Adhiambo and an affidavit by Orinda with his thumb print, was attached to it.
The family said after intense deliberation on the need to allow their son to concentrate on his treatment, the pending case was affecting his healing process. They added that the duo were friends before the incident, they did not wish to continue with the case.
The DPP asked for time as he sought to understand the motivation behind the move. He also asked for a mental examination of Orinda, to confirm whether he was in his right frame of mind to make such an application.
The mental examination was conducted on January 19, this year and it was found that he was mentally fit.
In the end the DPP objected to the withdrawal saying he has the mandate to charge, prosecute and withdraw cases and allowing a witness to withdraw will interfere with the mandate.
He submitted that the victim’s interest is paramount and should be distinguished from the victim’s desire.
The DPP said it was in public interest for the case to proceed to its logical conclusion because the MP acted with impunity by carrying a firearm to a social place despite notice and considering his standing in the society.
