The Director of Public Prosecutions wants three men accused of planning the escape of two Iranian Nationals currently in custody to be detained for 30 days pending completion of investigations.
Wesley Kiptanui (police officer), Shem grant Agyei (Ghanaian businessman) and Robin Nyangaresi (Nairobi Advocate) were arrested by the Anti-Terrorism Police on 22 and 24thFebruary respectively.
The suspects ensured we did not get their faces on camera by fully covering their heads
The trial court found Ahmad Abolfathi Mohammed and Sayed Mansour Mousavi guilty of possessing a lethal explosive identified as RDX and were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The sentence was however reduced to 15 years after a successful appeal at the High Court. They were later acquitted at the appellate court but the DPP appealed the mater at the Supreme Court where he sought to detain the two pending the appeal.
Principal Magistrate Peter Ooko heard that Kiptanui, Agyei and Nyangaresi are suspected to have been actively involved in an elaborate planning and execution of the escape of the two Iranians.
“The DPP has on several occasions received intelligence in relation to planned escape of the two Iranian nationals,” the DPP submitted through his assistant Duncan Ondimu.
Diplomat involved
It is alleged that on 10th February, in a bid to facilitate the planned escape of the two Iranians, a senior diplomat at the Iranian embassy booked a flight with Qatar Airways and there is need to obtain CCTV footage of the airline.
The court heard that investigations are complex and require additional time as it involves a number of agencies and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs due to the fact that the matter involves a senior diplomat at the Iranian embassy.
According to ATPU, information so far received show that the three met with a senior diplomat at the Iranian embassy on diverse dates and the main purpose of discussion being how to aid the escape of the two individuals.
“Some of the areas the meetings took place included premises covered under diplomatic immunity and there is need to seek assistance of the ministry of foreign affairs,” Ondimu stated.
The court heard that several electronic gadgets including phones have been recovered and have been submitted for forensic examination. However, the reports are yet to be obtained and analyzed.
Introductions
Kiptanui is said to have been introduced to the senior diplomat at the Iranian embassy around May and June last year by a friend currently only identified as A. Okello.
He later met him severally and brought in to the picture one H. Noor.
During another meeting at the CBD, Noor informed Kiptanui that there were two Iranian suspects in custody who were convicted and was looking for someone who could help with their removal from custody and repatriate them to their country as quickly as possible.
While this was being done, they were to ensure the involvement of the Iranian government is not seen.
Kiptanui was allegedly informed that they were willing to spend Sh 150 million.
Kiptanui later sought the assistance of the advocate who later informed him that he had someone who was well connected and was willing to help carry out the diplomats plans.
It is further alleged that in the first week of February, the three met at hotel within Hurlingham area and the Ghanaian stated that they should ensure that the two air-tickets are booked and their passports ready.
The prosecution also wants the three detained on grounds that they will interfere with witnesses and the ongoing investigations.
Defense objection
However, the lawyers for the three led by Cliff Ombeta objected the application saying that the DPP had not tabled sufficient grounds to warrant their detention.
“The prosecution has not stated whether the alleged interference is direct or indirect,” Ombeta submitted.
He also stated that the prosecution has not proved the respondents have the ‘financial muscle’ to pay the alleged 150 million shillings.
The court further heard that detention of lawyer Nyangaresi, Who was acting for the other two respondents before the arrest, is a deliberate calculation to torment him and extract privilege information between an advocate and his clients.
“Allowing the application is to help the applicant breach the area of an advocate and his client,” the defense submitted adding that it will have a direct impact on his career as he might be exposed to suits relates to professional negligence.
The ruling will be delivered on Tuesday 26th.
