Former Migori Governor Okoth Obado is awaiting sentencing after being convicted in the murder of university student Sharon Otieno.
As the sentencing date draws near, a debate has emerged over whether compensation to Sharon’s family could influence the court’s final decision and potentially spare him a custodial sentence.
According to lawyer Danstan Omari, who addressed the issue outside court, Kenyan law allows criminal courts to order compensation to victims or their families in appropriate cases.
The issue came up during the preparation of a pre-sentence probation report.
Omari said Sharon’s family had asked for compensation, including a house allegedly promised to Sharon, a vehicle, continued support for her children, and reimbursement for expenses incurred while pursuing the case over the last eight years.
He added that the report indicated the parties had been discussing the matter.
What Kenyan Law States
Kenyan law gives courts the power to award compensation to victims after an accused person has been convicted.
Also Read: Govt Employees Risk Salary Freeze Over Undeclared Wealth
Section 175 of the Criminal Procedure Code authorizes a court to order a convicted person to compensate an injured party when the facts proved in court establish civil liability arising from the offense.
“A court which convicts a person of an offence… and finds, on the facts proven in the case, that the convicted person has, by virtue of the act constituting the offence, a civil liability to the complainant or another person… may order the convicted person to pay to the injured party such sum as it considers could justly be recovered as damages in civil proceedings,” the section states.
The amount awarded should be one that could reasonably be recovered through civil proceedings.
The Victim Protection Act further strengthens the rights of victims by recognizing their right to compensation and restitution. The law was enacted to ensure victims are not forgotten during criminal proceedings and to provide avenues for financial redress where harm has been suffered.
Omari stressed that a criminal court has jurisdiction to order compensation and that such orders can be considered during sentencing proceedings.
Compensation as a Substitute for Punishment
While courts can order compensation, the law distinguishes between compensation and punishment.
Section 25 of the Victim Protection Act states that compensation or restitution orders are not part of a criminal sentence.
In simple terms, imprisonment, probation, and community service are punishments, while compensation is intended to address the victim’s loss.
This means that even if a court orders compensation, it can still impose a prison term.
Likewise, a court may grant a non-custodial sentence while ordering compensation.
“An uncustodial sentence is a sentence when you serve outside. You don’t go to prison. You remain outside but you serve a probation sentence called community service order,” Omari clarified.
The two decisions are legally separate, although courts often consider them together during sentencing.
Compensation does not automatically guarantee freedom for a convicted person, but it can be one of several factors a judge considers during mitigation.
Courts often examine whether an offender has shown remorse, accepted responsibility, attempted reconciliation, or taken steps to repair harm caused by the offense.
In such circumstances, compensation may be viewed as evidence of accountability and willingness to make amends. Nevertheless, the final sentence remains entirely within the discretion of the court.
What Next for Obado
In Obado’s case, the court will likely consider whether the compensation claims advanced by Sharon’s family are directly linked to the offence and whether there is sufficient evidence to support them.
The law also cautions courts against making compensation awards where the issues are too complex or where determining the value of the claim would unfairly prejudice the convicted person.
Some of the claims reportedly raised by Sharon’s family, such as a house allegedly promised to Sharon and continued support for her children, may require the court to assess whether they are legally enforceable and whether they arise directly from the criminal conduct.
The court set September 16, 2026, for the sentencing hearing, after receiving a victim impact report from a probation officer detailing the effect of Sharon’s death on her family.
Both prosecution and defense have been directed to file and serve their sentencing/mitigation submissions ahead of the hearing.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
The key legal distinction here is between compensation to the victim’s family and punishment for the criminal offence. Compensation may be relevant during sentencing, particularly when the court considers the impact of the offence and other mitigating factors, but it does not ordinarily extinguish criminal liability after a conviction for murder.