Chrisantus Aleke Atebe v Republic [2018] KEHC 5239 (KLR)

Facts

The Appellant was charged and convicted of three counts of offences under the Anti-Corruption & Economic Crimes Act No. 3 of 2003 (ACECA). The first and second counts were on corruptly soliciting for a benefit contrary to section 39 (3) (a) as read with Section 48 (1) of ACECA. The 3rd count was on corruptly receiving a benefit contrary to Section 39 (3) as read with Section 48 (1) of ACECA.

Issues

1. Whether the learned Magistrate erred in finding that the offences of solicitation and receiving a benefit had been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the learned Magistrate erred in admitting entrapment evidence presented by the Prosecution.
3. Whether the learned Magistrate erred in finding that a bona fide enquiry was not required to be conducted by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission’s (EACC) officers and the Prosecution.
4. Whether the learned Magistrate erred in disregarding the substance of the Appellant’s unsworn statement of defence.
5. Whether the learned Magistrate erred in finding the existence of mens rea and concluding that the Appellant had committed the offences.

Reasoning

The Court of Appeal found that the learned Magistrate's findings on the facts and law were not erroneous.

Outcome

Affirmed

Authorities cited