A petition has been filed to challenge the appointment of Wycliffe Oparanya as the Cooperatives and MSMEs Development Cabinet Secretary. The petitioner, Fredrick Mulaa, is seeking to have the court declare Oparanya’s appointment illegal and to revoke the Director of Public Prosecution’s (DPP) decision to review Oparanya’s case just days before his nomination. This petition marks the latest chapter in a dispute between the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) over the handling of corruption allegations against Oparanya.
According to the court documents obtained today, the petitioner lists the ODPP and the Attorney General as the first and second respondents, respectively. Oparanya is listed as the first interested party, with the EACC as the second interested party. Mulaa accuses the DPP of overstepping its authority by dropping charges against the former Kakamega governor without properly consulting the EACC. The charges, which included conflict of interest, abuse of office, money laundering, and conspiracy to commit an offense of corruption, were allegedly dismissed based on new evidence.
Mulaa argues that the ODPP’s decision to review and drop the charges without consulting the EACC breaches the public trust and violates both the Kenyan Constitution and the ODPP’s own guidelines. The petitioner points out that Article 10 of the Constitution, which emphasizes public participation and accountability, has been disregarded in this instance. Furthermore, the ODPP’s Guidelines on the Decision to Charge, specifically clause 3.1.2.2, mandate that the investigative agency and the victim should be consulted if a decision not to charge is reached.
“The 1st Respondent’s decision to review the decision to charge, premised on new evidence not presented before the investigative agency, is a breach of the public trust bestowed upon the office of the 1st Respondent,” reads the petition. Mulaa describes the timing of the DPP’s review as “conspicuous and coincidental,” suggesting that the review was intended to clear Oparanya’s path to the Cabinet.
The petitioner has requested the anti-corruption court to issue an order quashing the ODPP’s decision to review its charges against Oparanya, describing the move as “illegal, irrational, and unconstitutional.” Additionally, Mulaa seeks an order of mandamus to compel the EACC to publish all past and future corruption, economic crimes, bribery, and money laundering cases in the Kenya Gazette, where consent to charge was issued and subsequently withdrawn. He also demands that Oparanya’s nomination to the Cabinet be declared illegal.
This petition comes amid an ongoing clash between the EACC and the DPP over the handling of Oparanya’s case. The EACC has openly rejected the DPP’s proposal to review the charges against Oparanya, maintaining that the letter from the ODPP, dated 8th July 2024, was received by the EACC on 25th July 2024, well after Oparanya’s nomination.
The EACC’s stance reflects its commitment to maintaining the integrity of its investigations and ensuring that due process is followed. The commission’s refusal to accept the DPP’s proposal underscores the need for clear communication and cooperation between these two critical agencies in the fight against corruption.
As the case unfolds, it will undoubtedly be closely watched by the public and legal experts alike. The outcome of this petition could have significant implications for the relationship between the ODPP and the EACC and the broader efforts to combat corruption and uphold the rule of law in Kenya.
