High-flying agent pushed up the cost of ‘chicken’

A British printer paid a Kenyan agent huge amounts of money in commission because the agent was an important man in the country, he has claimed in court.

Mr Nicholas Smith, while conceding that the commission he claimed to have paid his agent was way too high, argued that it was proportionate because one of the local agents was “highly-regarded, chauffeur-driven, sometimes with police outriders, and commonly on the evening news”.

However, he denied that the money was meant as a bribe.

Mr Smith is a director of Smith & Ouzman, which, prosecutors say, paid bribes to officials of the Interim Independent Electoral Commission (IIEC) and the Kenya National Examinations Council (Knec) to get lucrative printing tenders.

The company’s agent was Trevy James Oyombra, a 35-year-old former procurement clerk at the disbanded Electoral Commission of Kenya.

On Friday, Mr Smith’s former wife burst out in tears at the Southwark Crown court soon after the accused was put in the dock.

Proceedings were put on hold for five minutes as a result of the incident.

When the presiding judge, Mr Justice Higgins, returned to the chambers after the short recess, he said the incident had been “disruptive to the jury”.

Indeed, one of the four women jurors looked upset. The case has 11 jurors, seven men and four women. The jury will decide whether the accused have a case to answer.

TRUSTWORTHY FAMILY MAN

Earlier, a retired school teacher, Ms Margaret Greenwood, had given a supporting character witness in which she described Mr Smith as an honest, respected and trustworthy family man, who was active in his church, hospital and local community.

The prosecution has alleged that Mr Christopher Smith, his son Mr Nicholas Smith and their company, Smith & Ouzman Limited, together with a Kenyan identified as Trevy James Oyombra, corruptly agreed to make payments to officials employed at the IIEC as an inducement or reward for the award of contracts to print election materials. The offence was committed between October 1 and December 31, 2010,

In the second count, they are accused of corruptly making payments to officials employed at the Kenya National Examinations Council as an inducement or reward for the award of contracts to print national examination certificates.

They have all denied the charges.

NO PROTOCOL

In his defence, Mr Smith said that he introduced formal contracts for agents with whom his firm worked in various countries. Before 2008, he said, agents worked on the basis of “handshakes”. He said there had been no protocol within the company on how to appoint agents, carry out due diligence or a policy on restrictions about which bank accounts money could be deposited.

Mr Smith told the court that family businesses — like Smith & Ouzman — were popular in Africa. He claimed that culturally, Africans preferred family businesses because they could be trusted and for this reason, Smith & Ouzman had an edge over its competitors.

African states, he further claimed, “liked shopping” for services in the UK because they were not keen on local businesses. He also said the company and its officials were respected because they had the expertise and were unlikely to be connected to a government or a faction.

He also said that because of the new and young democracies in Africa with election cycles of four or five years, there was pressure on agents to seek higher commissions. To him, agents had local knowledge, spoke the language, reduced cost, had “noses to the ground” and monitored potential businesses and their likely competitors.

The hearing continues Monday.