Michael Conlan, right, reacts after he lost a decision to Vladimir Nikitin in a men’s bantamweight quarterfinal bout.
BY NT CORRESPONDENT IN RIO.

The federation for amateur boxing, AIBA has chased away several referees and judges for making costly suspect decisions in bouts at the Rio Olympics.

The axe fell on several of them and to appease the boxing fan base they were removed from the remaining Olympic boxing competition.

It is after AIBA officials reviewed their decisions, fueling suspicion of dubious results in some matches at the Rio Games.

A spokesman for the international federation that governs amateur boxing said Wednesday that the names of the referees and judges who were dismissed and the matches that were tainted would not be released because he did not want to “besmirch their families.”

In a statement, the federation said that the committee that reviews officiating had assessed all 239 bouts at the Rio Games through Tuesday and had found that almost a handful decisions did not meet the criteria set.

It is following a ‘denied victory’ to Irish bantamweight Michael Conlan, who accused the federation of corruption and suggested that Russian boxing officials had bribed judges.

Conlan’s accusations came in
an expletive-filled tirade after he lost his quarterfinal bout to Vladimir Nikitin of Russia.

Nikitin was awarded a unanimous decision, but the public response to the verdict suggested that many observers believed Conlan should have won.

The judges’ decision in the Conlan-Nikitin fight was not the first one at the Rio Games to draw scrutiny. On Monday, the crowd jeered when another Russian fighter, Evgeny Tishchenko, was awarded a unanimous decision over Vassiliy Levit of Kazakhstan, who appeared to have won the bout handily.

The boxing federation did not say specifically how many decisions it deemed insufficient, nor did it specify what was wrong with those decisions. None of the decisions will be overturned, AIBA said.

Mother to Environment CS Judy Wakhungu Ms Grace Sarapay WaWakhungu at Milimani law courts  on Wenesday August 17,2016.

BY NT CORRESPONDENT.

The mother to Environment CS Judy Wakhungu will spend the night in police custody after failing to raise Sh1 million to secure her freedom.

Ms Grace Sarapay Wakhungu was unable to raise Sh1 million bond to secure her release.

She will be a guest of the state at Langata Women Prison.

CS Wakhungu’s mother had been arrested after failing to pay a Sh10 million loan.

Sarapay was nabbed while attending a wedding on Wednesday afternoon August 17, 2016 in Westlands, Nairobi.

An arrest warrant had been issued against her.

She appeared before the Deputy Registrar in Milimani Commercial Court, and was put to task to explain why she should not be jailed for failing to settle the bank debt.

In a case filed against her in 2014 by Middle East Bank Kenya Limited, the financial institution sought an order to compel her to pay back their dues.

The bank told the court the Ms Wakhungu has been stubborn and never shown interest to pay the loan.

The court has now directed her to settle the debt in one week time or she be committed to a civil jail.

Proceedings resume August 24, 2016.

Nacada CEO William Okedi at Milimani law court’s where he failed to be charged for making improper procurements at the anti-narcotics agency.
BY SAM ALFAN.

Nacada CEO William Okedi can now enjoy a little freedom after the court deferred his plea.
Mr Okedi is to be charged for making improper procurements at the anti-narcotics agency.

He contested the decision to charge him at the High Court which is awaiting a ruling.

But four other Nacada employees were charged with the offence of improper procurement.

Together with others, Okedi is said to have broken procurement laws by procuring a consultant to manage the Alcoholic Drinks Control Fund.

The fund had been set aside for civil society.

They denied that they committed the offence between September 2012 and April 2013.

The four were released on Sh1 million bond each with an alternative cash bail of Sh300,000.

Two suspects Zeudi Horbo and Hussein Ouman who were released on a cash bail of ksh 100,000 at Milimani law court’s on Tuesday August 16,2017.
BY SAM ALFAN.

Two suspects arrested for allegedly stealing a motor vehicle want the police to explain why they have continued to detain them without just cause.

Zeudi Horbo and Hussein Ouman, through their lawyer Evans Ondieki told the court that they were arrested on August 13 but have been detained without been charged.

Mr Ondieki said that instead of police  carrying out investigations, they chose to seek an order  to have the suspects held in police custody.

They have been in custody for five days.

The lawyer  told  Milimani resident Magistrate Electa Riany, that police have not even recorded statements from the suspects so as to present them in court within 24 hours as required by law.

“The mandatory period to keep a suspect in police custody is 24 hours any time outside that will be a violation of person being investigated” he said.

The court heard that the process of seeking extension of time has been abused by police, saying there is provision in the constitution to apply for the suspects  be released on cash bail  or bond pending investigation.

The suspects have reason to believe that police have abused the orders issued by the court  to hold suspects in their custody” the lawyer said.

Police have asked court to extend their detention from 5 to 30 days.

The trial magistrate ordered the two suspects to deposit a cash bail of Sh 500,000 each to secure their release.

She further directed that the two to report to the investigating officers at Pangani police station every day except on weekends.

The case will be mentioned August 25 to confirm progress made in the investigations.

Machakos Senator Johnstone Muthama at Milimani Magistrate court where he pleaded not guilty (FILE PHOTO).

BY SAM ALFAN.

A magistrate court is on the spotlight after it cleared Machakos Senator Johnston Muthama off allegations of incitement.

According to the Director of Public Prosecution, the mandate to clear Muthama was in the discretion of the High Court and not a magistrate court.

He will therefore appeal the decision acquitting Senator Muthama.

“The magistrate court has no jurisdiction to make findings on constitutional issues, “Dpp argues

He says that it is only the high court and other superior courts which have the mandate to interpret and make findings on constitutional issues.

High court Judge Luka Kimaru certified the matter urgent and set a hearing date on August 18.

Late last month Chief magistrate Daniel Ogembo dismissed the charge against the senator, saying it was unfair to have him in custody for four days for an offence he committed in 2015.

Muthama was in June this year charged alongside seven other lawmakers with incitement to violence. He denied the charge.

NYS Scam ‘mastermind’ Ben Gethi with his mother charity Gethi lawyer Edward Oonge at Milimani Magistrate Court where she was slapped with arrest warrant after failing to appear in court to face money laundering charge’s.(FILE PHOTO)
BY SAM ALFAN.

Attempts to plead with a magistrate to allow the sick mother to Ben Gethi miss court have been met with lots of opposition from the quotas.

The Magistrate court declined to lift a warrant of arrest issued against her.

This is despite her lawyer Edward Oonge literary pleading with court to address the plight of his client.

He even presented documents from the hospital showing that Ms Charity Gethi is chronically ill (she is suffering from diabetes) and has to attend the infirmary daily for injection.

According to the prosecutor, if the accused person is not admitted anywhere and she can go to hospital daily, she can also come to court or they can read the charges to her wherever she is.

The court said it will not lift the order until Ms Charity appears in person to plead to charges of money laundering over the loss of Sh791 million NYS money.

“I take court attendance serious and the accused should appear in court court” said the magistrate

Ms Gethi has failed to appear in court twice as earlier ordered with the arrest warrant being the court’s last result.

The order to arrest her was issued by Nairobi Magistrate Martha Mutuku.

Nairobi Chief Magistrate Daniel Ogembo had directed that all the accused persons appear on Monday in person to take plea over the allegations.

She with her son Ben, Josephine Kabura, Jedidah Wangui, KCB driver John Kago, Samwel Wachenje alias Sam Mwadime, Anthony Kihara, Paul Gachoka, John Vandamme and Martin Wanjohi have been smoked out as the masterminds to the scam.

Several attempts to have their prosecution suspended have also been thwarted by both Judges and Magistrates.

Muigai Attorney General Professor Githu Muigai making submissions in court.(FILE PHOTO).

BY SAM ALFAN.

Attorney General Professor Githu Muigai has taken on courts for denying the President power to appoint his preferred candidate as the next Chief Justice.

According to the AG, the high court erred in nullifying the JSC Act and has petitioned Court of Appeal judges to reinstate the law and give the president powers to pick a candidate of his choice.

The move reintroduces debate on whether or not the president should have a hand in choosing the next CJ.

He is accusing the High court of arriving at a wrong conclusion that ultimately nullified the amendments made to the JSC Act.

Through his lawyer Cecil Miller, Prof Muigai says that he will file an appeal to challenge the decision by a five judge bench that invalidated the law passed by the National Assembly.

The law compelled the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to submit three names to the President for him to choose his preferred candidate for appointment as CJ and their deputy.

The notice of appeal that was filed last week and scheduled for hearing today was consequently postponed to another date to allow the AG file the main appeal.

In May this year the High Court declared an amendment giving the President power to decide the next CJ null and void.

In a petition filed by Law Society of Kenya, the lawyers body repulsed a move by parliament to give the president powers to appoint the chief justice and his deputy saying it goes against the constitution and amounts to interference with the independence of the judiciary.