Tunoi lawyer pokes holes in Sh200m bribery affidavit

Suspended Supreme Court judge Philip Tunoi’s advocate, Fred Ngatia, has sought to discredit the testimony of a former radio journalist who claims to have facilitated the payment of a Sh200 million bribe to the judge to influence an election petition filed against Nairobi governor Evans Kidero.

The senior counsel Tuesday pressed Geoffrey Kiplagat hard to elaborate on the contents of his affidavit, terming his allegations “fiction”.

“Basically from what you have just said, you had no role at the petrol station because no such incident took place. It is just a creation of your mind,” Mr Ngatia told the former Kass FM presenter.

Mr Kiplagat, however, maintained that on the day of the alleged bribery he was picked from Kasuku Centre in Kileleshwa, Nairobi, by lawyer Katwa Kigen who was driving a Mercedes Benz, with the judge seated at the back.

He claims that after a briefcase changed hands at the petrol station in Westlands, he was dropped off on Wayaki Way and given Sh20,000 to attend a funeral.

Mr Ngatia questioned Mr Kiplagat’s memory over the actual size of the briefcase and whether or not he was privy to the contents.

The former journalist told the Sharad Rao-led tribunal that he had indeed sworn the affidavit in 2014 even though the bribery allegations against Mr Justice Tunoi only surfaced last year.

READ: Tunoi opts for private hearing into Sh200m Kidero bribery probe

In the heat of cross-examination Mr Kiplagat clarified that while there were several meetings held between the parties, the judge did not show up to some of the meetings held in Nairobi and Eldoret.

The tribunal, which includes retired judge Jonathan Havelock, Justice Roseline Korir, lawyer Judith Guserwa, Mr James Kaberere Gacoka, Mr Abdirashid Abdullahi Hussein and Mr George Munji Wakukha, began their sittings Tuesday at the Anniversary Towers in Nairobi.

The suspended judge through his lawyer asked the tribunal to put off further cross examination of Mr Kiplagat until the people who had been mentioned in his testimony had an opportunity to record their statements and appear before the tribunal for clarifications if need be.

“Every statement he gives leads to another human being, there is already a distinct possibility of him being recalled. It would be prudent to put off his cross examination until the individuals mentioned give their statements,” he said.

Lawyer Paul Nyamodi acting as the tribunal’s assisting counsel, however, objected to the proposal, saying that it would be prudent to finish with one witness before moving on to the next.

“All witnesses flow from this witness and the tribunal would not have a tidy record if we are to bring in a second witness then recall this one,” he said.

The next tribunal sittings were adjourned to April 26.