Court summons senior banker to testify in Tuju's Sh1.9b case

A court in Nairobi has handed former Cabinet Minister Rafael Tuju a major reprieve.

This is after it summoned a senior East African Development Bank (EADB) official whom Tuju claimed gave contradicting statements on what transpired in the Sh1.9 billion loan dispute.

Commercial Court Judge Alfred Mabeya ordered that David Washington Barnabas Ochieng Odongo should appear before him to answer questions that will be asked by Tuju’s lawyers.

This, the judge said, is in order to ascertain the truthfulness of his statement before the court.

.

Keep Reading business

•  TVETs to get Sh49 million funding for tech training
•  Amsons' bid for Bamburi Cement gets Comesa approval
•  Co-op Bank third-quarter profit jumps to Sh19b on higher income
•  I am not about to retire, Equity's James Mwangi says Premium
•  Report: Construction sector leads in mobile money use Premium

Mabeya was of the view that the regional lender will not suffer any harm if Odongo is asked to testify in person.

“I note that the judgment-creditor will not be prejudiced if the orders are granted for cross examination of the deponent David Odongo. It is proper for the truth to be established. It will be a travesty of justice if parties would be allowed to make statements on oath lightly. Court proceedings are solemn moments and a court of law should not countenance falsehoods. If that were to be allowed, administration of justice would be in jeopardy,” ruled Justice Mabeya.

Tuju, who is also a former Jubilee Party secretary general, claimed that in December last year, he alongside his children were summoned by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) to record a statement in relation to the loan battle.

The DCI also summoned Justa Ruguru, Ochieng and Isaac Nyongesa who allegedly appeared on behalf of the regional bank.

He said upon request, DCI supplied him with the statements and after analysis, Tuju discovered that Odongo had allegedly given a differing narration to the police to what he told the court.

“Replying affidavit dated November 17, 2023, filed on behalf of the plaintiff herein (EADB) contains factual statements that are not only dissimilar to the ones made in his replying affidavit made before this honourable court, but are also totally at odds and contradictory to the averments made in the aforementioned replying affidavit,” argued Tuju.

In the application, Tuju asked the court to also summon senior DCI officer Abdullahi Shuria, who was handling the complaint.

Tuju further claimed that Ochieng had recanted his statement in support of the bank’s case against him.

According to the former minister, the EADB’s official’s statement before the DCI corroborates his argument that the lender failed to honor its end of bargain as the deal was that the bank would finance the two projects and would recoup its money after acquisition of Tree Lane property.

Further, Tuju said that Ochieng admitted development of the real estate was a key component of the project to enable Dari Limited to repay the loan.