NAIROBI, Kenya – Former Kiambu Governor Ferdinand Waititu has suffered another legal setback after the High Court dismissed a constitutional challenge seeking to overturn the law barring people convicted of corruption and economic crimes from holding public office for 10 years.
In a judgment delivered on Friday, October 23, Justice Roselyne Aburili, on behalf of Justice Chacha Mwita, found that Waititu and his co-petitioners had failed to demonstrate why Section 64 of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act was unconstitutional.
The provision disqualifies people convicted of corruption or economic crimes from being elected or appointed to public office for 10 years following conviction.
The ruling leaves the challenged restriction intact, adding to Waititu’s legal difficulties following his conviction in the Sh588 million Kiambu roads tender scandal.
“The petitioners did not demonstrate why the section is unlawful,” the judge observed.
Why Waititu challenged the 10-year ban
Waititu and his co-petitioners challenged Section 64, arguing that the legal provisions governing their sentences raised questions about the lawfulness of their punishment and the protection of their constitutional rights.
They also contested the alternative prison terms imposed if they failed to pay their fines, arguing that the sentences exceeded the limits prescribed under Section 28(2) of the Penal Code.
The petitioners maintained that the sentencing provisions raised constitutional concerns beyond their individual cases.
However, the court found that they had not established that Section 28(2) applied to their circumstances, noting that their prosecution and convictions arose under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act.
The judge further held that a constitutional petition could not replace the proper appellate process for challenging convictions and sentences.
The court also found that the petitioners had failed to establish a specific constitutional violation attributable to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who was named as the respondent.
Sh588 million tender case behind the dispute
The case arose from the irregular award of a Sh588 million road construction contract to Testimony Enterprises Limited during Waititu’s tenure as Kiambu governor.
Waititu was convicted of corruption-related offences connected to the procurement and was fined Sh53.5 million, with a 12-year prison term as the alternative punishment.
Former Kiambu County Chief Officer for Roads Luka Mwangi Wahinya was fined Sh21 million or sentenced to seven years in prison, while businessman Charles Chege Mbuthia, a director of Testimony Enterprises Limited, was fined Sh295 million or sentenced to nine years.
The convicted officials and businessman were also barred from holding public office for 10 years.
High Court had already upheld convictions
The latest ruling follows a separate decision delivered on October 14, when Justice Rose Ougo dismissed appeals by Waititu and co-accused Charles Chege Mbuthia and Luka Mwangi Wahinya against their convictions and sentences in the corruption case.
In that decision, the court upheld the 10-year disqualification from public office and ruled that the fines imposed under the anti-corruption law were lawful. It also overturned acquittals on money-laundering charges involving Waititu and other accused persons.
The distinction is important: the October 14 judgment dealt with the criminal appeals, while the latest decision concerns the separate constitutional challenge to the law governing disqualification from public office.
The October 14 judgment also allowed the parties 14 days to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
What the ruling means
The dismissal means Waititu and the other petitioners have not succeeded in having the 10-year public office restriction declared unconstitutional.
The case places the legal consequences of corruption convictions back in focus, particularly the statutory limits on eligibility for public office and the distinction between challenging a criminal sentence through an appeal and challenging the constitutionality of the law itself.
For Waititu, the latest setback follows the loss of his criminal appeal and the continuation of proceedings over the additional money-laundering convictions entered on appeal.
The ruling does not introduce a new ban; it leaves the existing statutory restriction in place.
