DPP Appeals Acquittal of Ten Men in Eastlands Land Demolition Case
The Directorate of Public Prosecutions, led by Renson Ingonga, has filed an appeal challenging the acquittal of ten men who had been charged over the demolition of a perimeter wall on a disputed parcel of land in Nairobi’s Eastlands area.
The appeal, lodged before the High Court, targets a decision by a lower court that cleared officials of the Sowesavva Social Welfare Group, who are also laying claim to the contested land.
Those acquitted are Benita Olando, Peter Owino, David Makau, Kennedy Odhiambo, Titus Okoth, Boniface Anyiego, Calvince Ooko, Patrobas Otieno, Nick Owango and Philemon Otieno. They had been charged with malicious damage to property.
DPP Faults Trial Court’s Findings
In the appeal, the DPP argues that the trial magistrate failed to properly evaluate the totality of the prosecution’s evidence against the defence case, leading to a decision that was contrary to the weight of evidence on record.
The ten were acquitted last year by Trial Magistrate Robert Shikwe, who ruled that the evidence presented raised significant doubt as to the truthfulness of the claims against them.
“Consequently, they are found not guilty of the main charge of malicious damage to property and the alternative of forcible entry and they are accordingly acquitted under Section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code,” the magistrate ruled.
Prosecution Challenges Key Evidence
The DPP now says the magistrate misdirected himself by attaching probative value to the testimony of Dickson Otieno, a security supervisor with Gidjoy Investments Limited.
According to the prosecution, Otieno lacked the authority and personal knowledge regarding the issuance of an alleged enforcement notice relied upon by the defence.
The DPP argues that:
-
Otieno had no official authority from Nairobi City County to sanction the demolition.
-
He also lacked authority to testify on behalf of the county.
-
The acquittal was based largely on uncorroborated testimony, without proper consideration of the prosecution’s evidence.
Eyewitness Evidence Ignored, DPP Claims
The prosecution further contends that the trial court failed to give due weight to the complainant’s eyewitness, who positively identified the accused as the individuals who demolished the perimeter wall.
It is also argued that the alleged enforcement notice relied upon by the defence:
-
Was not addressed to the complainant, and
-
Related to a different property, Nairobi Block 82/7333, which was unrelated to the parcels supported by certificates of lease produced by the prosecution.
Intention to Take Over Property Disputed
The DPP also faults the magistrate for finding that the acquitted men had no intention of taking possession of the complainant’s land.
According to the appeal, witness Nick Omondi Onyango testified that the accused were laying claim to the properties as members of Sowesavva Self-Help Group, a fact the court allegedly failed to properly consider.
On alleged contradictions about arrest dates, the prosecution insists the evidence was clear:
-
The 1st to 7th accused were arrested on March 27, 2018.
-
The 8th to 10th accused were arrested later after being positively identified by the complainant.
Background of the Case
The ten men were charged with wilfully and maliciously demolishing a perimeter wall on March 27, 2018, at Donholm Phase 8, in Embakassi East Sub-County, Nairobi.
The prosecution alleged that the property belonged to Gidjoy Investments Limited, and that the accused chased away security guards from the premises in a violent manner while armed with crude weapons.
During the trial, the prosecution called eight witnesses to testify.
The High Court is now expected to consider whether the acquittal should be upheld or overturned.