The ruling marks a major turning point in a case that had attracted public attention for several years, with the court finding no evidence of abuse of office or misconduct by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in reaching the agreement.
In its determination, the court stated that the process leading to the agreement was lawful and properly conducted, dismissing concerns that the prosecution may have acted outside its legal mandate.
“The court has had difficulties finding that there was any abuse of power by the DPP,” the judge ruled, affirming the legitimacy of the prosecutorial decision.
The court further noted that the agreement satisfied all the legal conditions required under Kenyan law, making it valid and enforceable.
As a result, the court formally adopted the agreement, paving the way for the discontinuation of the criminal proceedings against the former county boss.
“The agreement has surmounted the legal test required, and this court hereby adopts the same,” the ruling read.
Following the court’s decision, all charges facing Obado were officially withdrawn under Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, effectively bringing the corruption case to an end.
Section 87(a) allows the prosecution to withdraw charges before a judgment is delivered, although such withdrawal does not always bar the possibility of future prosecution should new evidence emerge.
However, in Obado’s case, the latest ruling represents a major reprieve after years of legal battles.
The former governor had been facing allegations linked to the misuse of public funds during his tenure at the county government.
The case formed part of broader anti-corruption efforts targeting senior public officials accused of financial misconduct in county administrations.
The withdrawal of the charges is expected to spark mixed reactions among Kenyans, with some viewing the decision as a lawful outcome based on legal procedures, while others may question the broader fight against corruption and accountability in public office.