The withdrawal of a major corruption case against former Migori Governor Okoth Obado has reignited long-standing tensions between the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), exposing deep cracks within Kenya’s anti-graft framework.
The case, which involved allegations of embezzlement of Ksh 505 million through proxy companies linked to Obado’s associates and family members, has been one of the highest-profile county corruption prosecutions since devolution.
The DPP recently moved to withdraw the charges, citing insufficient evidence and procedural challenges.
However, EACC has strongly contested this decision, arguing that the withdrawal was done without its involvement despite existing court orders requiring the DPP to consult investigative agencies before altering or abandoning corruption cases.
EACC insists it was sidelined in the decision-making process, calling the move irregular and contrary to the constitutional requirement for inter-agency cooperation.
Obado’s troubles with the anti-corruption watchdog began in 2018, when EACC investigations uncovered what it described as a “well-coordinated scheme” that saw Migori County lose over half a billion shillings through fraudulent procurement.
The funds allegedly moved through companies associated with Obado’s relatives, close allies, and other proxies. Based on these findings, the Commission moved to recover unexplained wealth, successfully auctioning Obado’s assets and recovering over Ksh 73 million.
The DPP’s abrupt withdrawal of the case has now sparked widespread public criticism, with Kenyans taking to social media to accuse the ODPP of undermining the fight against corruption.
Many argue that the DPP has repeatedly failed to see major corruption cases through to conviction, describing the office as the “weak link” that allows politically exposed individuals to escape punishment.
Legal analysts have also weighed in, noting that the case had survived several preliminary objections and had been earmarked as one of the key tests of Kenya’s willingness to hold governors accountable for economic crimes.
The sudden withdrawal, they argue, undermines years of investigative work and weakens public confidence in state institutions.
EACC has vowed to challenge the DPP’s decision, insisting that transparency, consultation, and accountability must be upheld.
With public pressure mounting, the ODPP will likely be forced to explain its rationale more clearly, making this case a defining moment in the ongoing struggle for meaningful anti-corruption reforms in Kenya.
