The High Court has allowed the government to seize Sh3.8 million and 20 properties belonging to a former payroll manager at Elgeyo Marakwet county, saying they are proceeds of crime.
Justice Esther Maina said the Assets and Recovery Agency proved that Livingstone Tanui unlawfully benefitted from money he siphoned from the county.
She said the agency was able to demonstrate that Tanui not only inflated his own salaries but also falsified the payroll and paid himself millions. He earned between Sh96,278 and Sh103,278 at the time.
His net salary after deductions was between Sh30,804 and Sh40,982 but he would triple it.
Tanui’s wife, who was not even an employee of the county, received Sh30 million.
The forfeiture case was filed by the agency after obtaining information from the DCI that Tanui had fraud ulently manipulated, falsified and inflated his salary.
He did this between 2014 and 2017. He also made the payments to his three bank accounts and his wife’s account.
At some point he paid the wife a salary of Sh20 million.
This amount, according to the agency, was reflected on her five bank accounts. Tanui’s wife would then withdraw the money, which the agency believed was used to acquire the assets.
The agency produced Tanui’s bank statements, which the Judge said “when juxtaposed with the pay slips of the respondents, reveal that he indeed received salaries that were over and above his entitlement”.
The judge said Tanui could not explain the overpayments amounting to Sh2.5 million between April 2014 and February 2017.
“The evidence by the agency that Livingstone [Tanui] not only inflated his own salaries but also falsified the payroll and hence paid himself monies that were due to him at all has not been rebutted,” Justice Maina said.
“I am satisfied that the agency has demonstrated that Livingsgtone [Tanui] in abuse of his office embezzled funds which benefited him and his wife. The funds were unlawfully acquired from the county.”
In his defence, Tanui said they were involved in farming and selling of cattle but were unable to produce evidence to prove the claims.
“They
did not even bother to produce evidence of the specific days they engaged in such business,” Maina said.