1313/19 Kibera - R. vs. Jackline Mueni Mulonzi and Emma Ndunge Mutua 11.1 kg ivory
Kibera Court Chief Magistrate Ann Mwangi this past Tuesday (August 6th, 2024) acquitted two women of possession of 11.1 kg of ivory. While there was never an issue that Jackline Muene Mulonzi and Emma Ngunge Mutua had 5 ivory tusk pieces in their possession, the circumstances of that possession became the focal point of the trial.
Chief Magistrate Mwangi believed there was “a likelihood that they (the accused) had every intention of reporting the recovery (of ivory) to the authorities, and particularly to the KWS, but they were not guided appropriately, and, in the process, got entrapped”.
The two women had been charged with being in possession of the tusk pieces on October 2nd, 2019 in the Outer Ring Road area of Nairobi.
As per the judgement written by the Hon. Mwangi, the three involved KWS officers told the court they had received intelligence that there were people in Eastlands with ivory tusks and looking for a buyer. They went to the Outer Ring Road area in an unmarked vehicle on the morning of October 2nd. At approximately 12 noon, the two accused ladies approached their vehicle and a negotiation over the ivory took place and a price of 1.1 million shillings was agreed upon. One of the lady’s left to get the ivory and returned 1/2 hour later at which time they were arrested by the plainclothes KWS officers and the ivory seized.
The two accused, however, told the court that the second accused had found the ivory while she was searching for plastic bottles which she sold for her livelihood. She did not know what to do with the tusks and contacted her friend, the first accused. Jackline Muene Mulonzi had a friend who worked for KWS who she knew as Mrefu. He was contacted to look at the ivory and told the two women they could get a reward of 5000 shillings each if they turned it in. He said that he would make the arrangements.
The two accused told the court that the following day, October 2nd, 2019, they went with Mrefu to meet KWS to get a reward. When they arrived, they were arrested by KWS and Mrefu left, claiming not to be understanding of what was going on.
While to many, the story provided by the accused may seem implausible, the arresting KWS officers did themselves no favours.
They denied knowing any ‘Mrefu’, but testimony indicated that while there had been no direct phone communication between KWS officers and the accused prior to their meeting, it was clear that a never identified third party, perhaps ‘Mrefu’, had to be involved to set up the rendezvous. According to the judgement, one of the KWS officers told the court that “they used intelligence personnel to inform the accused of the registration of their motor vehicle.” Certainly it was more information than just that.
The waters were furthered muddied by the arresting officers failing to record details in their written statements of their conversation with the two women regarding price negotiations over the ivory.
In the end, the contradictions and anomalies worked in favour of the two women who were found not guilty.
It is rare for the courts to question KWS on entrapment issues when they are making ivory arrests through plainclothes undercover buyers. There is a need for KWS to ensure the use of required protocols to avoid ‘entrapment’ accusations when using informants and third parties. Entrapment is a defence often utilized by persons arrested by KWS.
