An uncle to Marianne Kitany has told a Nairobi court that Meru Senator Mithika Linturi produced a divorce certificate as an assurance that he did not in another marital relationship.
Andrew Chepkwony told the court that he and other elders called Linturi aside, before bequeathing their daughter to him, and asked him why he didn’t have a wife at his age.
“We called the senator to another room and asked him. At your age, you mean you’re not married? The senator went to his car and came with a divorce documents,” Chepkwony told Chief magistrate Peter Gesora.
Senator Linturi, he said, requested to pay the dowry in cash instead of the cows and sheep given as dowry. He said after negotiations Linturi chose to pay dowry in terms of money and gave out Sh100,000 in cash, after negotiations. He was answering questions paused by Kitany’s lawyer Dunstan Omari.
Chepkwony who took up the role of a father after the death of Kitany’s father, told the court that the Senator did marry their daughter in March 2016.
He refuted claims by Linturi that he did not marry her since he is married to another woman since he visited their home and carried out the necessary ceremonies of Nandi customary marriage.
The witness added that Linturi was accompanied by one Rufus Miriti who the master of ceremonies from Meru side and some other people whose names he could not remember.
The court heard when asked why the parents did accompany Linturi, he told Chepkwony that in Meru traditions, if a man is marrying for second time, he is not accompanied by his parents. Instead, he is accompanied by his age mates.
“After the negotiations and payment of dowry, we told him the girl was now his wife. We drunk fermented milk (mursik) as per Nandi traditions to cement the relationship,” Chepkwony added.
It was his testimony that Miriti later took out miraa (khat) and gave it to him. He then gave it to Kitany who chewed it and distributed to everyone at the ceremony including Linturi. This he said, he was told is according to Meru traditions as a sign of acceptance.
The uncle told the court that after the ceremony, Linturi gave Kitany’s mother a car (Nissan xtrail) as a gift and everyone at the ceremony witnessed it.
He further testified that he is shocked to hearing Linturi referring to Kitany as a visitor who had overstayed her visit since after the ceremony, she was his wife.
Chepkwony told the court that according to Nandi culture, if a couple separates and they had children the dowry will not be refunded dowry. But if the wife had children, the elders decided.
Assets Recovery Agency senior assistant state counsel Adow Mohammed (right) Ministry of health public director director Kepha Ombacho with Kenya Tobacco control alliance officials Achieng Otieno, Lucy Kombe(the lady) and Maurice Mando (red sweater) outside Supreme court after BAT appeal was dismissed on Tuesday November 26, 2019./PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY SAM ALFAN.
Leading a multinational cigarette and tobacco manufacturing firm (BAT) has been dealt a blow after the Supreme Court of Kenya directed it to comply with government regulations on cigarette packages to safeguard public health.
The five Supreme Court judges led by Chief Justice David Maraga, Deputy CJ Philomena Mwilu, Justices Smokin Wanjala, Jackton Ojwanga and Njoki Ndungu dismissed the appeal by BAT challenging the sanctions imposed by the state on cigarettes manufacturers and importers.
The Apex court upheld the decision of the Appellate Court, stating that the regulations must be complied with as they are legal and legitimate.
“The judgment of the court of appeal of Kenya at Nairobi in civil appeal No. 112 of 2016, is hereby upheld,” the Judges ruled.
The judges said they found no reason why they should delve into determination of how the superior court’s judgments should be executed or implemented.
The court did not interfere with court of finding that the solatium is not a tax. The appellate court was emphatic that the contribution is not a payment that goes towards the national revenue.
“We add that neither is it payment that goes to country revenue. It is not a payment that is made to be consolidated fund so as to be part of annual government budgeting and appropriation,” added judges.
The solatium is provided under statutes anchored with a clear framework on its purpose. The mere fact that a piece of legislation provides for the levying of a particular amount does not transform that the payment into a tax.
The Court of Appeal held that there was adequate consultation or public participation in the formulation of Tobacco Control regulations 2014 and that, except for regulations 1, 13(b) and 45, provisions are neither unconventional nor unlawful nor do they violate any right of the BAT.
In the matter, the Ministry of Health through a gazette notice on December 5, 2014 published the tobacco control regulations 2014 by a way of legal notice No. 169 (Legal Supplement No. 161). The regulations were made pursuant to section 53 of the Tobacco Control Act, 2007 and sought to regulate various aspects of the Tobacco sector in Kenya.
Section 53 of the Act gives powers of making regulations prescribing or prohibiting anything required by the Act to be prohibited or for the better carrying out of the objects of the Act.
BAT was aggrieved by the regulations and filed a petition at the high court challenging the lawfulness of the regulations and section 7,(2) 2015
The company lost the case and challenged before the appellate court which upheld high court decision.
Senior State Counsel Mohammed Adow told the court that tobacco use and consumption interferes with vital organs such as the brain, lungs, heart, liver and kidney and causes diseases, disability and death and it affects the health and lives of the present and future generations.
“Tobacco control and regulation is a global practice. Kenya being a respectable member of the international community and a party to WHO FCTC cannot be exceptional,” Adow submitted.
Mr Adow told Supreme Court the purpose of the regulation is to protect the global citizens, those who smoke and those who do not, from the harmful effects of tobacco consumption and use by informing them the effects of the same as per our bill of rights.
Businessman businessman Joseph Wanjohi and and his wife Jane Wambui Wanjiru before court./FILE PHOTO.
BY NT CORRESPONDENT.
The High Court is set to rule whether the property of businessman and his wife, facing charges of money laundering and dealing in game trophies, are proceeds of crime.
Justice Mumbi Ngugi said she will deliver her verdict on January 20 next year after completing hearing all the parties. Joseph Wanjohi and his wife Jane Wambui Wanjiru have maintained that they acquired the property legally.
The anti-graft court had earlier issued orders restraining businessman and their two companies, Sidjoe Manufacturers and suppliers and Marudiono zone Limited, from withdrawing Sh10.5 million from their accounts.
Anti-Corruption court further ordered the businessman to surrender his two luxury cars Range Rover KBU 950W and Mercedes Benz KCD 299H, both registered under the name of Joseph Wanjohi, to the Director of Criminal Investigation George Kinoti.
Asset Recovery Agency reiterated that they still believe the property of Wanjohi and his wife are proceeds of crime.
In the submissions, the agency said they opened an inquiry number 19/2018 to investigate the allegations in the two suspects’ accounts and the financial investigations revealed that the two accounts were holding a total of Ksh 10,589,069.9 million suspected to be proceeds of crime.
ARA said they believed that the money was obtained from illegitimate trade of wildlife trophies and dealing in narcotic drugs.
“There is reasonable cause to believe that the above funds and assets were procured or acquired using proceeds of crime from illegitimate trade of wildlife trophy and narcotic drugs by Joseph Wanjohi and his wife Jane Wambui Wanjiru and registered under the names Marudiono Zone Limited”, the agency told the court.
The agency in their application explained that Wanjohi and Wambui engaged the services of mules who acquire, convey, sell and distribute the narcotic drugs and wildlife trophies for and on behalf of the two within and outside Kenya.
It was submitted that that the benefit derived from this illegal trade of narcotic drugs and wildlife trophies were subsequently delivered to them by way of physical cash and deposits into their identified bank accounts by their agents, associate and conduit entities so to conceal, hide and disguise the source of the funds deposited.
Assets Recovery added that the two laundered the benefits of the narcotic drugs and wildlife trophies delivered to them by investing the same in the properties and assets identified with an intent of concealing, disguising and hiding the source of the funds used to acquire the assets in contrary to the provisions of the proceeds of crime and money laundering Act, 2009.
“The two in a scheme to disrupt the chain of investigations, source of funds and the connections between the assets they acquired through the benefits derived from illegal trade of narcotic drugs and wildlife trophies created and registered the Sidjoe Manufacturers and suppliers and Marudiono Zone Limited and others entities as conditions of money laundering and registered some of the assets in issue under the names of these conduit entities”, submitted the agency.
The agency added that an analysis of the statements recorded by the two does not logically explain the source of the assets and funds in the issue.
Wanjohi in their application said their business has stalled as a consequence of the frozen accounts thus jeopardizing their business transactions. They further contended that the preservation orders obtained against the application was open ended without a time frame within which investigations were to be conducted thus jeopardising their business.
They also claimed that majority of their assets preserved were acquired before the year 2099 to 2018 the period alleged that they had received money from illegal activities. They added that the alleged orders granted were previously the subject of preservation orders before the magistrate’s court for three months since August 28, 2018.
Wanjohi, his wife and the company dismissed and termed the allegations that they had been depositing cash in tranches of below shillings one million to avoid detection and questioning by the central bank of Kenya as a nonstarter.
“Regarding the drinks seized from their home, the applicants averred that they have been since been returned to them as the same constitute genuine import business. Touching on motor vehicle KBU 940W, the applicants stated that the property does not exist as it was involved in a road accident and same marked as a write off”, stated the ruling.
While disputing involvement in illegal trade on wildlife trophies, they termed the same as trumped up allegations and charges without cogent evidence and they had no relationship with acquisition of their property before July 2018 when those claims were made.
They also stated that they have been engaging in legitimate importation, wholesale and retail business of high beverages including alcohol and attached copies of cheques showing various bank slips made to the banks by customers and clients among others.
Supreme Court will deliver judgement tomorrow in case where British American Tobacco (BAT) challenged sanctions imposed by the government on cigarette manufacturers and importers, to safeguard public health.
The court will deliver the judgement 20 months after completing hearing the appeal that was lodged by BAT after losing two battles in both high court and court of appeal.
It’s not clear why the highest court of the land chose to take almost two years to the verdict. The court on August postponed the delivery of judgement saying it will inform the parties of the new dates through a notice.
“Take notice the matter is coming up for judgement on Tuesday November 26,2019 at 9:00 a.m before the supreme court of Kenya and not on October 25 ,2019”, state notice by Supreme Court registrar.
The apex court completed hearing the case on April 26, 2018 and promised to deliver their decision on notice. The appeal by BAT was heard by Chief Justice Maraga, Deputy CJ Philomena Mwilu, Justices Smokin Wanjala, Njoki Ndungu and Jackton Ojwang.
The habit of smoking in public is creeping back despite the ban by the government on ant-smoking.
In February 2017, BAT lost their appeal seeking nine months to implement health warnings contained in the 2014 Tobacco Control Regulations, which took effect in September last year.
A three-judge bench of the Appellate court held that the regulations by the ministry of Health satisfied statutory and constitutional requirements since their enactment was preceded by exhaustive consultations with all tobacco industry players and public participation.
The Appellate bench upheld the decision made on March 24, last year, by High Court Judge Mumbi Ngugi giving the green light to the Health ministry to fully implement the legal provisions.
In the second appeal, Attorney General urged Supreme Court to dismiss the case and penalize the company for wasting judicial time
A dealer has been with tax evasion charges and using fictitious names to claim tax refund.
David Ngari Nderitu of Aberdare Solutions denied several counts when he appeared before a Nairobi court.
Nderitu is accused of omitting Sh 30,424,249 from his Value Added Tax returns for the January to December 2015 an amount which affected his VAT liability by Sh 4.8 million which ought to have been declared and paid to the commissioner by the VAT Act.
Nderitu who is the sole proprietor of Aberdare is also charged with omitting another Sh 74,576,378 from his VAT returns fro the year 2016 affecting his VAT liability by Sh 11.9 million.
In another count he allegedly omitted Sh 28,828,941from his VAT for the year 2019 which affected his VAT liability by Sh 4,612,630.
The proprietor is accused of claiming VAT refunds using fictitious invoices from Bosco Enterprises Sh 14, 032,035 knowing the claim to fraudulent and without merit.
He is also alleged to have unlawfully claimed VAT refund using fictitious invoices from Davron Petroleum Limited.
Chief magistrate Martha Mutuku ordered him to deposit cash bail of Sh 100,000 to secure his release.
The case will be mentioned on December 10, 2019.
According to KRA, Nderitu is a beneficiary of the “missing trader” tax evasion scheme, a tax fraud syndicate where a taxpayer uses several registered business names for fictitious invoicing but there is no actual supply of goods and services.
Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi who wants Siaya Senator James Aggrey Bob Orengo out of Weston Hotel Land case.
BY SAM ALFAN.
Weston Hotel has told the court that National Land Commission found that the hotel is an innocent purchaser for value without notice of any defect in the matter.
While responding to a petition filed by Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) , Weston told the court that NLC did not make any finding that there was conspiracy between the hotel Priority Limited and Munene Investments Limited.
The hotel through lawyer Ahmednassir Abdullahi dismissed KCAA allegations that transaction between Weston and Priority Limited and Munene Investments Limited does not fall the test of bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the defects in the title as as it paid the purchaser price to Priority Limited and Munene Investments Limited as contracted .
“KCAA has no locus to decide a purchaser price for the parties to a based on the subjectives perspective of what amounts to valuable consideration”, said the hotel.
The hotel added that the famous Ndungu report did not make a conclusive decision on the issue of ownership of the suit property which is binding on the court and the report has not acquired any statutory form and and as such have no force of law and it is doubtful whether the recommendations therein legally identify KCAA as the legal proprietor of the property.
The hotel dismissed allegations by KCAA and said there was no evidence placed before NLC to show it WS reckless in purchasing the suit property or that building approvals were not issued and it had obtained as attached in the documents filed in court.
” KCAA allegations raised in the petition are pregnant with malice and falsities and a progeny of the KCAA’s insatiable desire to make mischief and are meant to deprive or threaten Weston hotel property rights in the suit property and to unjustly enrich KCAA”, Ahmdnassir said.
Ahmednassir added that KCAA has failed to demonstrate fraud and illegality on the part of Weston hotel, Priority limited and Munene Investment limited and has equally failed to demonstrate collusion between the aforesaid respondents in the acquisition and transfer of the suit property and apart from the pedestrian allegations, KCAA had not established that Weston hotel is not the bona fide purchaser for the value without notice.
He further added that Weston hotel had no knowledge of the fraud alleged by the KCAA neither was it a party and the hotel purchased the suit property in good faith for adequate consideration on the basis of the Priority limited and Munene Investment limited’s valid title and as such , it has indefeasible title that ought to be protected by the court.
Weston hotel Director Michael Nzile in his affidavit urged the court to uphold the sanctity of its title and dismiss KCAAA petition as it does not meet the required threshold for granting conservatory orders.
High Court blocked the valuation, sub-division, sale and transfer of the controversial land on which Weston Hotel in Nairobi stands.
The court stopped any plans on the controversial parcel, pending the outcome of the ownership dispute lodged by the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA).
Environment and Land Court Judge Bernard Eboso imposed the sanctions on National Land Commission (NLC), Weston Hotel Ltd, Priority Ltd and Monene Investments Ltd following and urgent application by the State agency.
The Judge stopped the implementation of the decision made by the NLC on January 25 allowing the owners of the hotel to pay compensation to the agency at the market value to enable it to purchase alternative land.
The disputed public land had been acquired by the defunct Directorate of Civil Aviation (DCA) in the early 1990s for the construction of its headquarters.
According to documents filed in court, On January 5,1998, a survey on the property was conducted which was authenticated and registered as LR 209/14372 bearing a deed plan Number 23496 and a new grant was booked for registration on September 5,2000.
“On September 5, 2000, the said grant was registered and change of the user to be used as shops and offices space was affirmed and on November 27, 2003 , Ministry of Lands and settlement wrote to National Land Commission confirming receiving the application for a change of user”, States court documents.
It further added that in December 19, 2003 , the director of survey’s wrote a letter of no objection to change of user so long as the physical planning requirements were satisfied. The transfer was effected on June 13, 2007 from Priority limited and Munene Investment in favour of Weston hotel limited.
” Consequently , the allegations bof fraudulent acquisition and registration are unsubstantiated and are nothing short of mere rumours propagated by KCAA in a resort to infringe, violate and limit Weston hotel’s right to property as aforesaid , the NLC did not reach a finding that the acquisition of title was fraudulent “, added Weston hotel.
It’s further stated that on June 17, 2009 , KCAA wrote to the Kenya Airports Authority informing them that they had received an application for a proposed hotel and in the circumstances it should provide comments on the proposal development.
Priority limited through lawyer Katwa Kigen told the court that they were exclusive owner of the disputed property.
Affidavit by Priority Limited director Paul Chirchir , the company told the court it was the owner of the land parcel to the exclusion of all others who were not registered including KCAA and according to the record he has seen , KCAA has never been a registered owner of the parcel.
” On the face of the pleadings and annexures thereto the petitioner (KCAA) has no viable or worthy evidence upon which it can lay a competing interest to Priority limited’s title. Otherwise and without prejudice to whatever the averments , in any event, the petitioner has never been the owner and or registered proprietor hence has no rights and entitlements to the parcel as pleaded or at all”, said Chirchir.
Chirchir said the allegations of improprieties and allegations or fraud on the Priority limited are denied. The company denied any impropriety in the registration, any unlawful on any allocation to the land and committing any acts of illegality , fraud or corruption on any dealings in relations to the parcel including allotment , registration and conveyance.
The company dismissed allegations of any forceful eviction KCAA, DCA or employees and any forceful eviction would have attracted the state power, personnel and accessories as the KCAA is a state body would have provoked the appropriate legal actions at the point of the alleged eviction.
It added that it is impossible as a private entrepreneur cannot evict it government.
Gospel Musician and wife to Vincent Ikedi Henry popularly known as nameless has been charged with obstruction and dangerous overtaking.
Rosemary Wahu Kagwi appeared before Senior Principal Magistrate Elekta Riany and pleaded not guilty to two charges.
She is accused that today at around 10 am along Ring road Kileleshwa in Nairobi, being a driver of a Mercedes Benz did allow the said vehicle to remain on the road likely to obstruct or cause inconvenience to other road users.
She is further accused of dangerously overtaking a motor vehicle.
A business man has been arraigned before court and charged with stealing millions from Kenya Commercial Bank.
Leornad Ndunda Kivuva appeared before Milimani Senior principal magistrate Bernard Ochoi and pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Leornad Ndunda Kivuva is accused that on dates between November 2, 2019 and November 13, 2019 at KCB Bank Limited Lavington Branch in Nairobi, jointly with others not before court stole 10 Million property of the said Bank.
He was released on a cash bail of Sh 800,000 and alternative bond of 2 million.
The criminal case will be heard on January 16, 2020.
A businessman has been arraigned and charged in court with conspiring to defraud Nairobi City County by pretending he could get authority to carry out demolition works.
Stephen Otieno Oduor appeared before Milimani senior resident magistrate Muthoni Nzibe and pleaded not guilty to all the charges against him.
Otieno is alleged to have pretended that he was in a position to assist the Directors of Lexis International Limited get the said authority and another authority to excavate and transport soil on October 10.
Otieno is further charged with forgery where he allegedly forged an authority to carry out demolition works document and a demolition fee receipt on October 18 in Nairobi county.
According to the charge sheet presented before the court, accused purported that a genuine document issued by Pancras Wamwandu Mwakazi, an officer working with planning department in Nairobi City County government.
Otieno is also charged with obtaining Sh 90,000 from Francis Mukiti Muandikwa by claiming he was in a position to obtain the authorities at the Nairobi CBD.
He was released on a cash bail of 20,000 with an alternative bond of 20,000.
Kituo cha sheria and thirty three parents of late students from Garissa University College University have moved to court seeking orders to compel the state to furnish them with the investigations report they hold I’ve the 2015 terror attack.
In their petition they are also asking high court to certify their petition urgent and place the file before Chief Justice David Maraga to appoint a bench to hear the petition since it raises substantial questions of the law.
They argue that there substantive legal issues touching on gross violation of human rights during a terrorist attack and remedies available in the circumstances.
“The petition raises novel questions bon whether there is an obligation on the part of the state to provide security in times of a terror attack and and issues raised are touching on terrorism , human human rights and national security which have not been considered in any other forum in the country”, said the petitioners.
They further said that the petition is predicted on the Independent Policing and Oversight Authority and Commission on Administrative Justice furnishing investigatory reports as the petitioners view the reports as key so their protection and exercise of theirs rights in the constitution.
They added there is a greater public interests in disclosure of the information in ensuring the petitioners obtain a remedy from the court and further promoting accountability by public bodies and servants.
Petitioners the national security of the country will not be prejudiced if the reports are made available in any case the courts can apply various measures to ensure protective disclosure is made to the court itself or to the advocates.
“The issue of national security do not fall beyond the jurisdiction of the court and the court ought to be furnished with such reports in exercise of its judicial authority as provided in our constitution”, added the petitioners.
