Kabete MP Ferdinand Waititu now wants Kiambu Governor William Kabogo to pay him Sh50.9 million as costs of a case that was ruled in his favor.
Justice Joseph Onguto had dismissed a suit filed by the Governor with cost on December 7, which prompted the MP to file a bill of costs of the petition yesterday.
Through lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui, the MP’s bill of costs contains the legal fees, the filing of various documents in courts and also the cost incurred on the different hearing dates.
In the suit, Judge Joseph Onguto dismissed Kabogo’s application saying that the court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine matters pertaining leadership and integrity after Kabogo moved to court to challenge Waititu’s academic credentials.
As alumni of Panjab University, Kabogo said that he was surprised by the claims of Kabete MP that he was in the same Indian university and earned a degree.
He alleged that the Kabete legislator does not possess any degree from a recognized institution of higher learning and there is no evidence that he went through a process of learning, tutoring and examination to meet all the requirements of the university degree.
Kabogo stated that residents and voters of Kabete Constituency and Kiambu County in general are entitled to be represented by persons who adhere to and comply with the principles of leadership and integrity.
In response, Waititu accused Kabogo of forging documents in the suit claiming that a document from Kenya National Examination Council (Knec) that shows the certificate filed by Kabogo in the court was not authentic.
He further claimed that it was Kabogo who did not attend Panjab University to study for Bachelor’s degree in Commerce. Waititu alleged that there is no single transcript that Kabogo has produced to demonstrate that he attended any course.
Justice Onguto however ruled that Kabogo should have filed his complaint at the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC). “The issues raised by the petitioner are matters that are not within the court’s jurisdiction, I therefore dismiss the application with cost to the petitioner,” he ruled.