|
|
Post by aeichener on Oct 18, 2006 20:25:49 GMT 3
"AG Amos Wako returns 12 Anglo Leasing cases to KACC citing significant investigation gaps"
Alternatively, I might compromise on a firing squad in Uhuru Park.
Alexander
|
|
|
|
Post by KOLONEL BRISK on Oct 18, 2006 23:21:08 GMT 3
Wait a minute before we crucify Wako, do we intend to have the same results like the Saitoti case. What is Wako saying if we avoid reading between the lines?
A court case, however, is only as strong as the evidence available to the Prosecution. The prosecution of fraud, particularly complex fraud is a task which has teased and challenged the criminal trial process. The Criminal Justice System provides a three stage process of deterrence.
The first deterrent is detection.
As most fraud is a calculated crime there is time to pause and contemplate the risk of detection. For this reason efforts made to detect and investigate fraud must be resourced and undertaken by competent, experienced people.
The second stage is prosecution to conviction.
If, when charged the suspect knows that the procedures to trial and likely conviction are efficient, timely and conducted by a well resourced professional prosecuting authority and the trial itself will be managed firmly by a capable judicial officer who will not tolerate technical frustration and objection, this will have to be factored into the risk equation by the would be fraudster before embarking upon the fraudulent conduct.
The third stage is sentencing.
Prosecuting fraud is not easy and, I regret to say, it is in the eyes of many becoming an increasingly difficult task.
There are a number of reasons for this:
Prosecutions depend for their successful outcome on the quality of the investigation. Limited resources and the ease of completing complex and cross jurisdictional fraudulent transactions make the task of the investigator more difficult.
The consequent delays in delivery of a brief, the preparation, disclosure and filing process and then the pretrial build up quite often cause delay and impact adversely on the quality of the prosecution product.
Defence difficulties, Deitrich applications and the availability of Legal Aid and the quality of representation for the impecunious (or even moderately well-off) citizen have their own deficits from the prosecution’s view point. A well resourced accused on the other hand can, and often will, create further problems of technical challenge, obstruction and delay of a type which most Courts appear either incapable or unwilling to confront.
The Court process itself bristles with every conceivable difficulty. The rules of evidence, judicial management, the claimed inappropriateness of the jury as an adjudicator of guilt in complex commercial matters coupled with its own human frailties in dealing with the rigours of a difficult and sometimes long running trial (what for example is the statistical likelihood of 12 people hearing a 6 month trial, not losing one day through illness) provide the average punter with “a real chance in the trial process” Judges are reluctant to take a firm hand and discipline prosecutors and defence counsel. Many Judges are reluctant to become involved in an assertive control of the trial process through fear of falling into appealable error.
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo12345 on Oct 19, 2006 1:14:12 GMT 3
This is a summary of Wako's statement. www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=1143959789The Nation version is more clear on one aspect I find quite interesting and important. "Among concerns Mr Wako raised yesterday when returning the files was a failure by investigators to record statements from foreign-based witnesses who played roles in the deals, and the possibility of some suspects who are also witnesses in other corruption cases becoming hostile to the State and helping accused people escape justice."www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=1&newsid=83743Alexander:I think I am going to keep my bazooka this time with regard to Wako. He has done a lot of damage to the Kenyan judiciary system over the years including being part and parcel to murder and terror of Kenyan political activists by refusing to investigate cases even when they were specifically referred to him by an Inquest. In this case the person you might want sent Uhuru Park for public lynching is our 2 million paychaque dude, Justice Ringera. Lets take Wako's contention that it is hard to prosecute the alleged local operatives in the anglo scum and leave out there international connections. I think he is right. Ringera is going to claim such connections are complex and hard to untangle, but there is one catch. Do you remember the government claimed there was almost 2 billion wired back to the Treasury? Who wired this money back and from where? This is the crux of the matter and incredibly NOT Mwariria, NOT Kimunya, NOT Kiraitu and NOT Ringera can tell Kenyans who wired the money back. Obviously nobody can wire that amount of money back without providing their identity ( that would be money laundering and they would be bursted). The government knows the people and the institutions who sent the money back. Why are they protecting them? Ati investigations are still going on. That is crap. Wako is telling them give me all the names of the culprits or keep them. That is the first time I can accuse Wako of having guts. That is a good thing. I concur with John Githongo that the central characters in this scam are very close to Kibaki himself. My suspicion is that members of Kibaki family and very close friends are at the heart of the problem. That is why even Ringera has conceded nothing can be done until after 2012. They think Kibaki will last that long.. Good luck. Then we have lack of statements from the CBK. This is unbelievably shoddy work by Ringera. Why are the folks at CBK not making written statements one way or the other? Protecting people? Fear of perjury charges? Remember it is the CBK that got the money paid and wired back. And the mix up on those who may be witnesses and those to be charged. The investigators are supposed to figure that out. This is supposed to be one of the sources of information. It is simple bargaining with those who can offer information to nail the big fish. Of course you are not going to allow murderers to provide evidence against those who are accessories to their crimes. It is often the other way round. The most baffling thing about this saga is that two branches of government we are paying to protect the nation from thieves and ripp-offs artists cannot even sit down and work things through. They communicate through the media. What does that tell you? The whole thing is a cruel joke on Kenyans and pure politics. Kenyans will win this war alright but it will long after Ringera, Wako and Kibaki are gone. Adongo. |
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Oct 19, 2006 1:21:12 GMT 3
Adongo: you miss the issue, I fear.
Entirely.
A.
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo12345 on Oct 19, 2006 1:27:19 GMT 3
Alexander:
Enlighten me and others.
Entirely
Adongo.
|
|
|
|
Post by mossad on Oct 19, 2006 3:21:22 GMT 3
I do Agree with Adongo and Alexander on the incompetence of Ringera and wako.
Wako seems to have a particularly unique problem. Since he came to office, he has not successfully indicted any corrupt official in both moi's and Kibaki's govts. All he does is show us his big teeth from the wild smiles he offers everytime he's confronteed with a question of national importance. This guy should actually go as well as Ringera and Kibaki. But at least Kibaki and Ringera are gaining from the loot they're successfully getting from wako's incompetence. But you know what, Wako will claim he has a job to keep and a family to feed and he'll do all what the boss want.
Mossad.
|
|
|
|
Post by consigliare on Oct 19, 2006 5:03:37 GMT 3
"Most of the suspects named in the inquiry files are proposed to be charged for failing to ensure that budgetary provisions were made for the projects in the estimates of expenditure approved by Parliament, contrary to Section 3(2) of the External Loans and Credit Act."
"A number of the proposed charges are based on failure to comply with regulations under the Exchequer and Audit Act (Public Procurement) Regulations 2001."
Please unzip this one for me. Doesn't it seem that even by the AG's scalage the charges being considered are all procedural non-compliances. What is so criminal about "failing to ensure that budgetary provisions were made for the projects". What penalty doe it carry. All this time I thought KACC was trying to nab the big fish and slap them with fines worth several millions and many years behind bars. If I was Uncle Moody and the rest of those thugs, I would tell the AG to shut up and go ahead with the bubblegum prosecutions. I would even save the good Attoney General the agony by going pro se.
|
|
|
|
Post by wanyee on Oct 20, 2006 0:36:32 GMT 3
Shouldn't Mr. Wako be immediately and thoroughly investigated, if not dismissed, on account of his questionable record?
|
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Oct 20, 2006 1:43:06 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Oct 27, 2006 12:24:35 GMT 3
|
|
