By NDERITU GICHURE
Nyeri, Kenya: In a typical case of the hunter becoming the hunted, a Nyeri gubernatorial loser is staring at the possibility of being hauled to court for criminal charges following the recommendation of the Court of Appeal.
Thuo Mathenge, who had challenged the election of Nyeri Governor Nderitu Gachagua, is facing a probe over his academic credentials after the appellate court directed the Director of Public Prosecution to commence investigations.
Dismissing Mathenge’s appeal, the three-judge bench ruled that he was not qualified to vie for the coveted seat in the first place.
In a ruling read by Justice Alnashir Visram on behalf of his two other colleagues Lady Justice Martha Koome and Justice Otieno Odek, the judges noted that there were questions about the university degree presented by Mathenge at the nomination level.
The judges directed the office of the DPP to immediately commence an investigation to ascertain how Mathenge acquired a degree in social science from Fairland University in Uganda.
“The degree produced in court was suspect because it was different from others issued on the same day to other students,” the judges noted.
They observed that even the signature said to have been appended on the document by the academic registrar as well as the chancellor of the university was suspicious, saying it might have been a product of forgery.
The judges pointed out that an honorary degree the appellant claimed to have received from the university was not an academic degree.
He said for one to acquire an academic degree, he or she has to attend lectures, tutorials and sit for exanimations “but the appellant did not produce material evidence of how he got the degree.”
“The university might have been recognised in Kenya by the time, but the degree which was produced in court was a counterfeit of what other students at the university obtained at the time,” he said.
On other issues raised by the appellant, the judges concurred with the High Court ruling that upheld the election of Gachagua, saying that misprint of the name did not affect the outcome of the election.
“People were not voting for the deputy governor and the appellant did not provide any material evidence that people protested and voted for other candidates,” Visram stated while reading the judgement. The judges said the evidence adduced by the appellant was based on speculation.