FAKE GOLD SUSPECT JARED OTIENO’S COURT APPLICATION TO GET BACK HIS PORSCHE PANAMERA DISMISSED.

Mr Otieno is at the centre of a Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) investigation into a racket that conned a Dubai Royal family member of Sh300 million with claims that he was able to sell him gold worth Sh300 million

Fake gold dealer Jared Otieno in court

Anti-corruption court judge John Onyiego has dismissed an application made by the chief suspect in a fake gold case before him. Mr Jared Kiasa Otieno the suspect, had pleaded with the court to have the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) surrender his custom made 2015 Porsche Panamera back to him.

The High Court’s anti-corruption division on November 20, last year, revisited an order that barred Mr Otieno from using, selling, or transferring the vehicle to anyone else. This meant that the ARA, which had impounded the luxurious vehicle pending completion of investigations, would be compelled to return it to Mr Otieno.

Mr Otieno is at the centre of a Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) investigation into a racket that conned a Dubai Royal family member of Sh300 million with claims that he was able to sell him gold worth Sh300 million. The car was impounded last year alongside a custom-made 2018 Bentley Continental GT worth at least Sh47 million as detectives investigated the fake gold ring that has since entangled embattled Ford-Kenya party leader Moses Wetang’ula.

IMPOUNDED VEHICLE

Aggrieved by the court’s decision, the ARA asked both the anti-corruption court and the Court of Appeal to temporarily stop the execution of the seizure orders, as it challenged their overturning. Owing to the scarcity of hearing dates, ARA has been seeking an extension of the orders stopping execution of the directive that would have allowed the suspect to get hold of his vehicle.

On April 27, Mr Otieno filed a fresh application seeking to recover the vehicle on grounds that the ARA has been abusing the court process by seeking an extension of orders barring him from recovering his vehicle.

ARA, however, argued that the Court of Appeal had also issued an extension, hence the High Court would be attempting to supervise a superior court in allowing Mr Otieno to take back his vehicle.

COVID-19 PANDEMIC

The last extension that the ARA secured, and which allowed it to keep the car, was issued in April, and was to last for two months. Justice Onyiego has now ruled that due to the Covid-19 pandemic, parties in court must adapt to a new mode of operation and that releasing Mr Otieno’s car will be premature.

The judge argued that parties must have their day in court, so that a fair decision is made because it would be premature to set aside the interim orders and direct release of the vehicle. “From the face of the record, there is no error apparent nor mistake or discovery of any new evidence or material facts or any other sufficient reason to warrant review or setting aside interim stay orders which had lapsed at a unique time when courts could not sit due to coronavirus and then extended,” he said.

“To set motor vehicle the subject of stay application and orders pending hearing and determination will be premature. However weak and unmeritorious the application may be, parties should have their day in court,” Justice Onyiego ruled.