Is Handrianus Putra the most important ivory trafficker in Kenyan history?
In the world of ivory trafficking, indeed as it is with the drug traffickers, the stature of the person(s) charged is often measured by the quantity or the status of lawyers representing them. Using that standard as the bar, Kenya has just convicted the most important ivory trafficker in it’s history.
On October 23rd, 2023, in the small, office cum courtroom at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA), Nairobi, Handrianus Theodore Putra, an Indonesian national and United Nations Security Officer, was convicted and sentenced for possession and trafficking of 38.4 kg (84.5 lbs) of elephant ivory. The court was told that Putra had been carrying the contraband ivory in two suitcases on an air journey that began in Bangui, Central Africa Republic and meant to end in Jakarta, Indonesia. He was intercepted in Nairobi.
Handrianus Putra, however, was not your average small time ‘mule’ or just another traveller caught with ivory, unknowing of its illegality, as he so claimed.
Eight days after his arrest, on October 17th, Mr Putra attended the JKIA law court for arguments on mitigation as per his guilty plea. He had with him six different lawyers. Yes, he was pleading guilty.
The lead was high profile advocate, Danstan Omari, with three other junior associates. Omari has had amongst his previous clients, the ex-Cabinet Secretary for the Ministry of the Interior, Fred Matiang’i, and was presently representing Pastor Ezekiel Odero, a wealthy Kenyan televangelist accused over the mass killing of his followers at Shakahola where over 400 people are known to have died. Omari was also recently short listed to fill the vacant role of Director of Public Prosecutions for Kenya. Putra’s legal team was supported by two other experienced lawyers from Nairobi area law firms.
Six lawyers representing one client, and particularly for a guilty plea, surpassed the present Kenya standard by two. In 2014, Feisal Mohamed Ali was charged (with others) in 2.2 tonne Mombasa ivory trafficking case and had representation by four different lawyers. Feisal Mohamed Ali was affiliated to the Akasha drug family.

The obvious question? Who exactly is Handrianus Putra?
News of the initial arrest made the local media, not through the police or Kenya Wildlife Service, but through a news release by the Kenya Airport Authority (KAA). They reported that: “The vigilant Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) security team at Terminal 1 C discovered the illicit cargo during mandatory passenger screening.” Photographs were also shown, depicting KWS personnel beside the two seized suitcases containing 23 tusk pieces, 18 worked ivory pieces, and 4 rings. Details as to his destination were not divulged. Many of the national media outlets carried the story but atypically did not include his name.
More information on the seizure and Mr. Putra came out in open court. The prosecution began by explaining to the presiding magistrate, Senior Resident Magistrate Renee K. Kitagwa, the general circumstances of Putra’s initial detention by KAA security staff who found the contraband ivory. They contacted the JKIA police who arrested the accused, with identity subsequently confirmed through his passport, UN security identity card, and boarding pass. The Kenya Wildlife Service also attended and seized the ivory for safekeeping. The two pieces of luggage were weighed and found to contain 19.6kg and 18.8kg of ivory respectively. The ivory and suitcases were displayed to the court.
Danstan Omari led off the arguments on mitigation. He began by telling the court that his client had wanted initially to plead not guilty. Omari and the defence team, however, advised Putra that due to stringent wildlife crime laws in Kenya recently enacted (certainly subjective), he would be better advised to change his plea.
Mr. Omari did not add that there were other advantages to a guilty plea. First of all, a guilty plea would likely cap any further investigation, important if this was organized crime. Secondly, the guilty plea allows the facts of the case to be read into court by the over worked prosecutor, who while having many other cases to handle, may only remember the basic facts thereby translating into a lighter sentence for the accused. It is also not unheard of for there to be a previous agreement between prosecutor and defence lawyer for certain pertinent facts to be left out of the prosecutor’s summary to the court. That again could translate into a lighter sentence.
Mr Omari continued by explaining to the court that Mr. Putra was an Indonesian police officer who was also working as a UN security officer in the Central Africa Republic (CAR). At the time of the arrest, the court was told that Putra was transiting from the Kenya Airways, Bangui – Nairobi flight, to a Qatar Airways, Nairobi to Jakarta, Indonesia, flight. The court was advised that Mr. Putra had purchased the ivory as part of a traditional dowry gift for his in-laws in adherence to his traditional customs. He continued by telling the court that in CAR the trading in ivory was not illegal (false), and that his client had no knowledge that he was contravening any laws, and strangely, that his client had no intention of passing through Nairobi and JKIA. Mr. Omari also pointed out to the court that the way the ivory was placed in the baggage within a polythene bag would indicate that the accused was making no attempt to conceal it.
Mr. Omari introduced two observers to the court, one being the Head of Criminal Investigations of Indonesia and the other an investigator colleague.
Mitigation arguments were continued in turn by four more of the defence team, all expounding minor variations of the same theme; their client was a victim of circumstance, an upstanding citizen and police officer who had gone through significant vetting process for his current assignment, he was unaware he was contravening any laws, he was a first-time offender, and he showed deep remorse. It was put forward that an appropriate sentence in these circumstances would certainly be deportation and perhaps a fine. The sixth lawyer never had an opportunity to address the court, being shut down by Magistrate Kitagwa, who at that point, had heard enough.
There was no counter to any arguments presented by the defence, some of which were incorrect. In Central African Republic, it is illegal to transport ivory out of the country without a CITES permit. CITES, or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, is an international agreement enacted to ensure that trade in species does not threaten their survival. In Indonesia, the trafficking of ivory is illegal under Law No. 5/1990 on natural resources and ecosystem conservation as well as under Article 55 of the Criminal Code which carries a maximum jail sentence of 5 years and an equivalent fine of approximately USD $6500.
Mr. Putra’s exculpatory claim that he had no intention of passing through Nairobi, a claim that was advanced only through Mr. Omari, had no merit and is virtually impossible with present travel protocols.
As far as Danstan Omari’s claim regarding Kenya’s stringent wildlife crime laws, one wonders if Mr. Putra was aware that the typical sentence to come out of the JKIA law court over the past 6 years has been a fine of KES 1 million (USD $6,500) or in default one year in jail. The lone exception was the case of Chinese national, Cao Juano, who was arrested in July 2017 with 120 kg of ivory as she was transiting for Hanoi from Zimbabwe. She was sentenced to a 6 million shilling fine (USD $40,000) or in default, one year in jail. She had been in custody for seven months at time of sentencing which was included as time served.
Nevertheless, on the surface, it would appear that the Hon. Magistrate Kitagwa did not buy the six-lawyer intimidation act or the ‘ivory as dowry’ story. Six days later, on August 23rd, in JKIA courtroom 2, with only a clerk, Mr. Omari, the accused, and a representative of the Indonesian Embassy present, she pronounced sentence. On the charge of Dealing in Wildlife Trophies, Putra received a sentence of KES 3 million fine (USD $20,000) or in default 7 years imprisonment, and for Possession of Wildlife Trophies, he received another KES 3 million fine (USD $20,000) or in default 5 years imprisonment. The sentences were to run concurrently meaning that both sentences would run together simultaneously with 7 years being the longest serving term in a Kenya prison. The following day, Handrianus Putra was on a flight out of Kenya.
While Putra’s penalty may have appeared more severe than seen in the past, there is an inherent challenge for the court in handing down sentences with jail and fine option. How does the court set a fine amount that is seen as just and a deterrent? It is not uncommon for criminals of considerable wealth or affiliated to organized crime groups to walk away essentially scot-free as the cost of doing business. In this particular case, while there is no direct evidence of organized crime involvement, the circumstances here would surely indicate that Mr. Putra was something more than an individual mistakenly carrying an ivory dowry gift to his in-laws.
In contrast to this sentence, a few days later, in a courtroom barely 20 kilometres from JKIA, Jesse Mwangi Karanja, Ngugi Muigai, and Catherine Kabura, were imprisoned for 10 years without a fine option for transporting 3 kg of ivory on a motorbike.
Perhaps surprisingly, despite the initial media interest in the arrest, there was no coverage on the conviction and sentencing. The lone outsider to the proceedings was a representative from SEEJ-AFRICA, a small organization that follows ivory prosecutions in Kenya courts of law. They were approached and asked what it would take not to post their report. Were other media outlets asked the same?
The most important questions to be asked here? Have lessons been learned and shared that will shut down a repeat occurrence? Will the involved airports and investigative agencies share the facts and intelligence?
How did two suitcases, each with almost 20 kg of what was very obviously elephant ivory, bypass x-ray scanners and security protocols? At what airport did that occur, bearing in mind that the flight transited Doula, Cameroon and that Putra wasn’t arrested at JKIA until 3 hours after he landed and just prior to his Qatar Airlines flight? Perhaps he was not even on the particular Bangui – Nairobi flight? Could he have received the ivory at JKIA? Have baggage handlers been compromised at one of the involved airports? Did he use his United Nations identity card to assist in buying his way through any security checkpoints? What is his previous travel history? And what of his statement to the court, advanced only by Danstan Omari, that he had no intention or foreknowledge that his flight would transit through JKIA in Kenya, a statement that is a clear mistruth and would make no sense to anyone with even a modicum of travel experience. Perhaps that was just a breakdown in interpretation?
Perhaps the essence of all these questions could be answered by just one. Who actually paid the invoices for the most important ivory trafficker in Kenyan history?