Bitter Jaramogi's inheritance fight leaves the Oburu empire in cracks

A three-decade-old quiet in Kenya’s former Vice President Jaramogi Oginga Odinga household has erupted into a court battle pitting  Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) leader Oburu Odinga against his step-siblings, niece and stepmother.

At the heart of the case is Jaramogi’s wealth, which Walkowa Akinyi Odinga, Isaac Raphael Omondi Oginga, Susan Agik Oginga and Pamela Lorna Akoth Agola claim that Jaramogi’s wealth has never been distributed to-date while some prime properties were left out of the 1996 succession process.

At the same time, they claim that the children of the late Ngire Agola, who was also Jaramogi’s son, were left out of the succession.

The four want the court to order the preservation of 56 hectares (140 acres) property in North Sakwa, and a disclosure of rent collected from properties in Kango Estate, Kileleshwa, claiming that if the court does not intervene, there is an alleged risk of further dealings and erosion of the patriarch’s wealth.

Oburu was a joint administrator with former Prime Minister Raila Amollo Odinga. Oburu has intimated that he feared a fallout within the family, including their late father’s estate upon Raila’s passing.

True to his fears, and a year after Baba joined the ancestors, his siblings are now in court asking the court to force him to account for the 30 years of managing his late father’s wealth.

Their targets are bank accounts, mobile money, and another veil lifting for a property dubbed Rongai farm.

Akinyi and Omondi state that they are Jaramogi’s children, while Agik was the deceased’s third wife. In the meantime, Akoth is Jaramogi’s granddaughter and Agola’s child.

Jaramogi died on January 20, 1994. Thereafter, Raila and Oburu became administrators of the estate.

In the initial administration case, it emerged that Jaramogi’s two first names almost caused his family to lose out on a loan that ought to have developed the land he had left them after his death.

The Standard can reveal that the grant was given in the name of Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, whereas the name on the title deed was under Jaramogi’s other name Ajuma Oginga Odinga.

These different names made the Agricultural Finance Corporation decline to release the loan to the former Prime Minister and his brother, Senator Oburu, who were administrators of the estate.

The loan offer, according to court documents, was to lapse within 30 days.

Appearing before the court for the Odinga family, lawyer Benjamin Aggrey Okuom made an application to have the issue resolved through “an amendment of the grant of representation and certificate of confirmation”.

“The deceased’s estate badly requires the loan for development and improvement of some of the agricultural land constituting it,” he said.

Raila and Oburu, in support of the application, told the court they were not aware that their father had registered a different name on the title before he died.

They said they only found out after banks released the titles they were holding as security to loans that their father had taken.

The two produced a copy of North Sakwa land in support of their claim. This land, measuring 56 hectares (140 acres), was bought by their father in 1973. There were other pieces of land registered under his name, and they shared these, as well as an undisclosed amount of money held in banks and shares in terms of percentage.

Raila and Oburu each received four per cent of their late father’s wealth, as did their two mothers, Agik and Betty Rosa Oginga.

Agik and Rosa, according to the affidavit before the court, were young women by the time the former powerful politician died. Agik was 35 while Rosa was one year older, at 36.

In fact, Raila and Oburu were older than their stepmothers by 13 years and 14 years.

Born in 1912, Jaramogi is said to have married five wives: Mary Ajuma, Gaudentia and a third one known to the family and neighbours only as Nyar Uyoma. Rosa and Agik were his fourth and fifth wives.

His first wife, Ajuma, bore him nine children, namely Oburu, Raila, the late Agola, Wenwa, Beryl Achieng, Ruth Adhiambo, the late Odima, Shadrack Osewe and Erick Odhiambo.

In the court papers, only the fourth and fifth wives were indicated as dependants. Other children indicated were Dr Wenwa Akinyi, Carolyn Akinyi, Isaac Oburu, Emily Ayango, Albert Adur, Wilson Ating’a and Corazon Aquino.

Others who got a four per cent share include Wenwa, Achieng, Osewe, Ruth and Akinyi. The biggest beneficiaries of Jaramogi were his two youngest sons (Ating’a and Adur) and two daughters (Corazon and Anyango) who got 11 per cent of the estate.

In 1996, Corazon was the youngest at eight years of age, followed by Ating’a, who was 9, then Adur, who was 10. Adhiambo closed the Odinga’s teenage bracket at 16 years.

Court documents showed that at the time of his death, the former vice president had a Sh10 million debt. This had, however, been paid by the time his children moved to court seeking letters of administration.

Because Odinga did not have a written will by the time he died, the court records are missing the last wishes of the deceased.

In the fresh case, Oburu’s siblings, niece and stepmother now claim that properties in Kileleshwa, Nairobi; Rongai; Karen; Kisumu; North Sakwa/Nyawita; and agricultural properties/interests in the Koru, Muhoroni/Fort Ternan area were not disclosed to the court as part of the wealth Jaramogi had amassed while he was alive.

They alleged that an official search of the Sakwa property allegedly revealed that it had been subdivided into two and was registered in the names of Raila and Oburu. The court heard that as at August 26, 2016, the title was still under Jaramogi’s name.

The gazette, according to them, indicated that the title deed to the property had been lost and indicated an intention to have a new title.

In the case, they insist that a complete succession, land registry and all other relevant documents relating to the change, subdivision and registration of the new parcels ought to be produced before the court.

“The Estate has not been fully administered, and no complete inventory and account of all the assets, income, transmissions, disposals and distributions of the Estate has been made available to the applicants. The circumstances set out herein disclose material matters concerning the identification of the estate and its beneficiaries, the administration and distribution thereof, and the dealings undertaken in respect of assets belonging or potentially belonging to the Estate,” their lawyer Juliet Dima argued.

They want the court to annul the existing grant in a bid to have all the beneficiaries registered and all the wealth Jaramogi had amassed also included.

They asserted that they do not seek to disadvantage any person who is in the disputed properties, but urged the court to preserve the entire estate for identification and accounting purposes.

Dima said that they are not at this stage also asking the court to make a final determination of the beneficial ownership.

“The applicants therefore seek revocation and or annulment of the existing grant so that this Honourable Court may regularize representation of the estate, identify all beneficiaries and assets, call for the necessary accounts and disclosures, and thereafter supervise the lawful completion of the administration of the estate. Applicants have since established that material Beneficiaries and assets of the deceased were omitted and or were not adequately disclosed in the succession proceedings,” argued Dima.