Tags: Kenya

Well firstly there needs to be the desire, both in terms of public consensus as well as at governmental level, though some could argue these should be one and the same in an ideal world. Subsequently, the rule of law underlines the principles of a democratic government and there is no scope, in most cases, to deviate from the law, however damning the circumstances might be.

Legal interpretation does not always have much in common with public perception that the government is not doing enough to combat corruption; the accused persons or entities are entitled to defend themselves and in a common law country, like Kenya, the burden of proof lies upon the prosecution to demonstrate guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

On 27 January, 2016 an Anti-Corruption Court in Nairobi convicted a public officer who worked as an accountant/cashier at the Ministry of Special Programs in Kenya. The officer was found to have embezzled funds that were allocated for specific donor funded water projects and was convicted on two counts: fraudulent acquisition of public property (count 1) and forgery (count 2) but was acquitted on a charge of abuse of office. The officer was sentenced to three years (jail) each for count 1 and 2 plus a fine of Kshs 60,000, which if unpaid will result in an additional 6 month jail sentence. The sentence meted is considered severe by some given that the accused has to serve the sentence and pay the fine as an additional punishment.