The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) has firmly denied accusations of malice in its handling of the corruption case involving Wycliffe Ambetsa Oparanya, the Cabinet Nominee for the Ministry of Cooperatives & MSME Development. In a detailed response, the EACC has sought to clarify its stance and address the allegations made by Oparanya’s legal team.
In a letter dated 1st August 2024, addressed to the National Assembly and widely circulated to media houses, Advocates for Wycliffe Ambetsa Oparanya accused the EACC of acting with malice. They claimed that the EACC falsely asserted that Oparanya still faced an outstanding corruption case despite the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) having allegedly withdrawn or recalled his earlier approval of the EACC’s recommendations to prosecute the former Governor.
Responding to these accusations, the EACC clarified its position, distancing itself from the claims made by Oparanya’s lawyer, Ken Nyaundi, who is also a suspect in the case. The Commission acknowledged that on 25th July 2024, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) sent a letter dated 8th July 2024, withdrawing the DPP’s decision of 18th December 2023, which had initially granted the EACC consent to charge Oparanya.
However, the EACC stated that it did not accept the DPP’s reversal on the matter. “The Commission wrote back to the DPP reiterating its earlier recommendation to charge all suspects, including Wycliffe Oparanya and his lawyer Ken Nyaundi,” the EACC said. The Commission emphasized that its decision not to comply with the DPP’s directive to close the file and terminate the case was based on detailed reasons provided in its response, including the compelling evidence on record.
This evidence, the EACC noted, had previously been deemed sufficient by the DPP to prosecute the suspects for conspiracy to commit an offence of corruption, abuse of office, conflict of interest, and money laundering. Therefore, the allegation by Oparanya’s Advocate and co-suspect, Ken Nyaundi, that the EACC acted with malice and misled the National Assembly about the existence of a corruption case against Oparanya is false and without merit, according to the Commission.
The EACC’s steadfast refusal to drop the charges against Oparanya and Nyaundi underscores its commitment to accountability and transparency in public office. The Commission’s insistence on proceeding with the case, despite the DPP’s change of stance, highlights the complexity and contentious nature of corruption investigations and prosecutions in Kenya.
This case has drawn significant public attention, not only because of Oparanya’s high-profile nomination but also due to the broader implications for the fight against corruption in Kenya. The EACC’s actions reflect its mandate to uphold the rule of law and combat corruption, even when faced with political and legal challenges.
The ongoing dispute between the EACC and the DPP regarding this case raises important questions about the independence and coordination of Kenya’s anti-corruption institutions. It also underscores the need for clear and consistent procedures to handle such high-stakes cases, ensuring that justice is served without undue influence or interference.
As the situation unfolds, the public will be closely watching how the EACC, the DPP, and the judiciary navigate this complex legal landscape. The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for future anti-corruption efforts in Kenya, reaffirming the importance of integrity and accountability in public service.
In conclusion, the EACC’s response to the malice claims in the Oparanya corruption case reaffirms its dedication to upholding justice and combating corruption. The Commission’s unwavering stance, despite opposition, highlights its crucial role in maintaining transparency and accountability within Kenya’s public institutions.
