The Way to Win Current Fraud and Corruption War in Kenya

The Kenya leadership led concerted purge on fraud has a tall order to bear any significant successful prosecution. The challenge is on the prosecutor to navigate and rise bar in presenting proper cases. This implies being able to effectively proof of Corrupt and Fraudulent Practices. Proving cases require admissible evidence. Admissible evidence requires legally obtained Information that is relevant “tends to prove, or disprove, a fact of fraud. In fraud or corruption investigations, this means that a piece of evidence with high probably and relevant (compelling and convincing) to prove, or disprove, an element of a Fraud offense. The high threshold includes proof of knowledge and intent of the suspected offenses using direct or circumstantial evidence.

For success at Director of Public prosecution, use of proper -Evidence (not general information) is critical in the fight against rampant graft in Kenya. Proper corruption and fraud cases the combination of direct and circumstantial evidence usually presented persuasively and collaboratively to exclude any doubt, accident or mistake or error, and illegality/ unconstitutional inclusions. Evidence should be acquired under explicit chain of custody for admissibility. To prove knowledge, intent and motive, proper investigation should be supported by detailed record (what, when, where, how, why, who, etc.) the witness statement, proceeding transaction after fraud occurrence like Money laundering activities. The evidence can exclude non relevant activities to only include chronology and evidence arising from suspect and prosecution interviews, proof showing suspect committed illegal activities and has lied. This forms basis of a good where direct evidence that include Witness statements (participated in the act, Saw them being done, or told from a subject of the investigation), documents and data, “Real” evidence, road site, Demonstrative evidence such as photos, charts and graphs.

Direct evidence is supported by Circumstantial evidence - Proof knowledge and intent by among many other things, proof that the subject, or someone acted at his or her direction, e.g., deliberately Altered or forged, Deliberately destroyed a relevant document, or improperly withheld key documents from investigators, lied to investigators or to another party about a material point to hide guilt, Obstructed the investigation, Committed prior similar acts “pattern evidence” etc.

Inclusion, whereas Kenya is on the right track by choosing to fight fraud, I would be more prudent to foremost focus in enabling and expediting legal recovery of proceeds of fraud crime than prioritize the costly prosecution. What can help the economy more is to see figures of what has been recovered more that number of cases under prosecution. As a success strategy, wealth with unexplained sources needs to be recovered immediately followed by prosecution because criminal use proceeds of crime to buy their defense. Moreover, beyond creating technical capacity to fight fraud, it is critical for Kenya to go beyond deterrence to creating fraud Prevention capabilities. This may include public awareness where culture on integrity is promoted by all leaders, religions, public and private sector. Kenya should also create policies that can create more jobs and promote culture of hard work as the only legitimate means to create personal wealth and built a great nation.

Best wishes to Kenyas DPP