VZCZCXYZ0008
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHNR #0550/01 0390703
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 080703Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY NAIROBI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9414
INFO RUEHDS/AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA PRIORITY 8177
RUEHDR/AMEMBASSY DAR ES SALAAM PRIORITY 4453
RUEHDJ/AMEMBASSY DJIBOUTI PRIORITY 3944
RUEHKM/AMEMBASSY KAMPALA PRIORITY 1123
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 1851
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 1833
RUCNFB/FBI WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RHMFISS/CJTF HOA  PRIORITY

UNCLAS NAIROBI 000550 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
LONDON AND PARIS FOR AFRICA WATCHERS, L/LEI FOR D. BUCHHOLZ 
AND K. MUELLER, DOJ/OIA FOR P. ROWAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: CJAN CVIS KCRM SNAR KE
SUBJECT: UPDATE: EXTRADITION OF KAROLI MULIRO 
 
REF: A. (A) STATE 17590 
 
     ¶B. (B) 05 STATE 227184 
     ¶C. (C) 05 STATE 180672 
 
¶1. (U) This is an action cable - action request para 5. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Post has engaged directly with the Director of 
Public Prosecutions (DPP) Keriakio Tobiko, and held lengthy 
discussions with the case prosecutor, Horace Okumo, 
concerning the U.S. extradition request for Karoli Muliro to 
stand trial in Massachusetts. Post first engaged the Kenyan 
government on the day of Muliro's release (December 28). Well 
before receipt of ref A, Post sent a diplomatic note of 
protest on December 30. In addition, Post has also spoken 
with the magistrate who acceded to Okumo's request to 
withdraw the state's bid for extradition. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The issue appears to rest on confusion between 
Kenyan law and U.S. law and the types of crimes covered by 
the extradition treaty. The exact charge Muliro is facing, 
"vehicular homicide while under the influence," does not 
exist as such in Kenyan law. While both manslaughter and 
homicide do exist and are extraditable, homicide while 
driving a motor vehicle is technically not an offense covered 
by Kenyan law. The Traffic Act has a separate charge for 
manslaughter while under the influence. This case has also 
suffered from an inter-ministerial communication problem, as 
the police arrested Muliro on the basis of the Embassy's 
October 7 diplomatic note without waiting for the proper 
legal arrest order from the Attorney General or DPP. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Post has made clear that we do not understand the 
reason for the termination of the proceedings (the prosecutor 
told us he feared losing the case; the judge told us 
subsequently all appeared in order). We have also asked that 
Muliro be rearrested as a flight risk. Okumo stated he simply 
needs confirmation from Massachusetts authorities that the 
crime alleged to have been committed matches crimes in Kenya 
and is covered by the extradition treaty. With those 
assurances in hand, he stated, Kenya would both rearrest and 
pursue extradition. DPP Tobiko has provided similar 
assurances. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) In late January, Post placed prosecutor Okumo in 
direct email contact with the prosecutor in Massachusetts. We 
do not know, however, the result of their conversations. 
ACTION REQUEST: Post would appreciate information as to the 
status of efforts to provide Okumo informally with what he 
seeks before we again submit a diplomatic note. In 
particular, we would appreciate any information regarding the 
precise information that Okumo requires to proceed with 
Muliro's extradition. Please advise. 
 
¶6.  (U) Text of diplomatic note previously submitted follows, 
for Washington's information: 
(No. 1748, December 30, 2005) 
 
      The Embassy of the United States of America presents 
its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the 
Republic of Kenya and wishes to make renewed reference to the 
Extradition Treaty between the United States and the United 
Kingdom of December 22, 1931, made applicable to Kenya by 
exchange of notes dated May 14 and August 19, 1965, and 
entered into force on August 19, 1965. The Embassy requests 
that the Government of Kenya, specifically the Attorney 
General of the Republic of Kenya, take any and all steps 
necessary to effect the immediate arrest and extradition of 
KAROLI MULIRO. In this regard, we also wish to make renewed 
reference to Diplomatic Note No. 1433, of October 7, 2005. 
      Mr. Muliro,s case was terminated in the High Court of 
Kenya on December 28, 2005, at the previous request of the 
Office of the Attorney General. While the Embassy has yet to 
be formally notified of this action by Kenyan authorities, 
the Embassy was informed informally that the basis for this 
termination rested on two conclusions reached: 
¶1.    Failure of the Kenyan Police to follow proper 
procedures: &Order from the proper Ministry.8 
¶2.    The offense Muliro is charged with does not meet the 
elements agreed upon between the United States and Kenya for 
extradition. 
 
The Embassy requests that the Government of Kenya re-visit 
this issue urgently on the basis of the following 
information, which does not appear to have been taken into 
consideration in reaching these conclusions: 
On October 24, 2005, the Minister of Home Affairs sent a 
letter to the Commissioner of Police, Kenya Police 
Headquarters, MFA.390/420/002A. In this letter the Permanent 
Secretary, D.C. Kitogho, referenced the United States request 
 
SIPDIS 
for the arrest and extradition of KAROLI MULIRO. Mr. Kitogho 
instructs the Kenyan Police to, &Kindly and urgently respond 
as you may wish to investigate.8 Based upon this response 
from the Permanent Secretary Kitogho, the Kenya Police CID 
located and arrested Mr. Karoli. The letter from the 
Permanent Secretary was in response to our Diplomatic Note 
No. 1433, dated October 7, 2005. A copy of the letter from 
the Permanent Secretary is enclosed (as Exhibit A). A copy of 
the Diplomatic Note is also enclosed(Exhibit B). 
In response to the issue of Mr. Karoli being charged in the 
United States for an offense that arguably does not meet the 
specification set out in the extradition treaty, the Embassy 
draws attention to a previous case heard in the Chief 
Magistrate,s Court at Nairobi, Misc. Case No. 22 of 1986. In 
this case, THOMAS ANTONY WILLIAMSON was brought before the 
court after being arrested under a provisional warrant in 
pursuance of a warrant of arrest issued in California for the 
offense of manslaughter and driving under the influence. In 
this case Chief Magistrate H.H. Buch ruled the following: 
&Upon being satisfied as to the identity of the prisoner to 
be that of the person required by the Department of State, 
United States of America for the alleged offense of 
Manslaughter which is an extraditable one and upon being 
satisfied with all documents produced in support, I now order 
that the prisoner Thomas Antony Williamson upon completion of 
his current term of imprisonment, be handed over to Interpol 
Section of Criminal Investigation Department Headquarters, 
Nairobi for the purpose of extradition to United States of 
America as requested.8 
 
This order was signed by Chief Magistrate H.H. Buch on May 5, 
¶1986. A copy of this ruling is enclosed (Exhibit C). 
Additionally, regardless of any specific actions or inactions 
by the Kenya Police, presently there is an active Interpol 
Red Notice (Control No.: A-2049/12-2005) for the arrest, 
pending extradition, of KAROLI MULIRO. Kenya,s membership in 
Interpol and the issuance of the Red Notice alone provide 
Kenyan law enforcement authorities with all the legal basis 
necessary to arrest Mr. Muliro. As Interpol,s website notes, 
Red Notices &serve to communicate to the world,s police 
that a suspect is wanted by a member country and request that 
the suspect be placed under provisional arrest pending 
extradition.8 A copy of the Red Notice for Mr. Muliro,s 
arrest is enclosed (Exhibit D). 
Presently a Diplomatic Note, No. 1710, conveying the original 
&Request for Extradition8 from the United States of America 
is in the hands of the Office of the Minister of Home Affairs 
awaiting delivery to the court. This official request was 
hand-delivered by U.S. Embassy courier on December 21, 2005. 
The Embassy requests that the Ministry of Home Affairs 
expedite this request so that the United States can fulfill 
all the obligations set forth in our Extradition Treaty. A 
copy of this Diplomatic Note and the Request for Extradition 
has also been enclosed (Exhibit E). A complete copy of the 
documents in support of this request are attached to the 
original request that is now in the hands of your Minister of 
Home Affairs. 
Finally, the Embassy notes with dismay that its officers were 
never approached for clarification on either of the 
conclusions said to have been the basis for the decision to 
not pursue extradition. Indeed, both American and Kenyan 
employees of the U.S. Embassy had gone to the Court to attend 
the extradition hearing scheduled for December 28 (where such 
issues were to have been discussed before and decided by the 
judge) -- only to learn then that the State had unilaterally 
withdrawn its case days earlier. 
Given his record of having already fled the U.S. jurisdiction 
(despite having posted bail and being ordered not to depart), 
his years as a fugitive in Kenya, his pattern of 
international travel to Uganda from Kenya, and the Kenyan 
court,s decision to previously withhold his passport, we 
continue to believe Mr. Muliro poses a significant flight 
risk. We therefore seek that Kenya authorities move with 
dispatch to arrest Mr. Muliro at this time. 
In conclusion, the Embassy renews its request for the 
immediate arrest of Mr. Karoli Muliro pending extradition. As 
the Embassy has never been informed officially to the 
contrary, we also consider the original Request for 
Extradition contained in Diplomatic Note No. 1710 as still 
currently valid and of full force and effect. We request 
immediate notification if the Government of Kenya believes to 
the contrary. We ask that the materials in Diplomatic Note 
No. 1710 be presented to appropriate court authorities as 
soon as possible and that the Embassy be provided 
confirmation of the delivery of said documents. As always, 
the Embassy stands ready to assist Kenyan authorities in any 
and all stages of this process. We also formally offer to 
assist the competent Kenyan authorities in establishing a 
clear and streamlined process for assuring smooth execution 
of provisional arrest and extradition requests, in either 
direction, between our two countries. 
The Embassy of the United States of America avails itself of 
this opportunity to renew to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
of the Republic of Kenya the assurances of its highest 
consideration. 
 
Enclosure: 
Documents &A8 through &E8 as described in text. 
 
Embassy of the United States of America, 
     Nairobi, 30 December 2005. 
 
 
 
BELLAMY