Former Homa Bay County employee, couple ordered to repay Ksh12m corruption proceeds

Former Homa Bay County Assembly clerk Bob Otieno, Lilian Aloo and her husband have been ordered by the High Court to refund Sh12.57 million in corruption proceeds.

Otieno, Aloo and her husband were ordered to repay the public funds paid into their joint bank account for work the court found was not adequately proved.

Justice Benjamin Musyoki ruled on October 16, 2026 that the three must refund the amount in full as well as interest from the date the suit was filed and legal costs incurred by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission’s (EACC) as they were liable for loss of public funds.

EACC had on April 11, 2022 filed the suit seeking recovery of the money, interest and costs.

The anti-corruption body presented 12 witnesses, including procurement, human resource and finance officials, bank representatives and forensic investigators.

This was following payments made between 2015 and 2017 which according to EACC, were irregularly disbursed through a salary suspense account into an account held jointly by Aloo and her husband.

EACC traced the money from three accounts associated with the county government and Assembly at the Central Bank of Kenya and Co-operative Bank as reported by The Star.

Payment was made through an Equity Bank suspense account before reaching the couple’s joint account after which Aloo’s husband withdrew the cash.

At the time, Aloo was a teacher employed by the Teacher’s Service Commission and had never worked for the Assembly as confirmed by the assembly’s Human Resource department officials.

This even as the payroll manager told the court that payments were made to her account and recorded as salaries despite her not being a county employee.

EACC also presented proof that its probe found no invoices or payments in Aloo’s favour in the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS).

Procurement officers said they had not found tender documents, advertisements, requisitions, bids, evaluation minutes or award letters to support the disputed payments.

The three defended themselves by denying any wrongdoing, arguing that the suit lacked merit because of a separate EACC case involving Otieno and four others.

The co-accused insisted that they were paid for services to the County Assembly of Homa Bay by Damila Enterprises, a company owned by the couple, and not salaries paid to Aloo.

However, the court dismissed their assertions as they failed to adequately account for the money as what they said conflicts with the amount received for funeral services.