Plea for Adequate Funds to Process Lodging an APPEAL To Exhaust the Defective, Inconclusive, Deficient, Misguided, Misleading, Arbitrary, Biased and Political-Legal Abuse Decision of the Advocates Complaints Commission c/o the OAG Impunity on COMPLAINT-CC/PE/AUG/22/36 To Thus Close the File as detailed in the attached PDF:- ( I Squeezed Final Submission Vol. 12 Subject To Deadline Extension To The ACC-Secretariat: Ombudsman-Kisumu PDF-Attachment back to square-A ACC c/o OAG: GoK sadist, animist-witch, GLBTQ-Occultist ex-President Uhuru's and co. political-legal abuse endemic, systemic-and-systematic corruption continued sanctioned endless-persecution ( for purposes of shielding his criminal co-conspirators, accomplices and bosom-buddies from persecution ) to embezzle me my now 10yrs 4-months Kihara-Construction accident evidence-destruction / spoliation continuous-violations-of-the-law series-of-crimes 10m+ litigation damages case as Ombudsman-Kisumu finally replied on 25th July 2022 on a PDF-letter addressed way back on 28th April 2022 even before the Ombudsman-Nairobi contacted me on 23rd May 2022. I pray the divine-intervention of civil-society-groups / concerned authorities to Fasttrack arrest-and-prosecution of the impunity for purposes of expediting payment of my risked damages as I wane in virility at 44yrs of imposed pauperism unable to date or marry. SOS) .

• ErickM-compl-C.pdf

  433.6kB

To Civil-Society-Groups, Concerned Authorities, Well-wishers and Friends,

                                                                                                                      Plea for Adequate Funds around KShs 1,000-2,000 to Process Lodging an APPEAL To Exhaust the Defective, Inconclusive, Deficient, Misguided, Misleading, Arbitrary, Biased and Political-Legal Abuse Decision of the Advocates Complaints Commission on COMPLAINT-CC/PE/AUG/22/36 To Thus Close the File as detailed in the attached PDF below. SOS.

                                                                                                                      Soft-loans, funds or spare-cash can be channeled through:-

                (1.)- MPESA { +254723047863 or +254764087863 };

 

            (2.)- Equity Bank, Migori Branch, Acc. No. 1160168298894 ; or

 

              (3.)- PayPal { https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=CBUZUFVRAWK2J }

as I work round the clock drafting the APPEAL amid cyber-cafe power blackouts, rain and hunger-tortures to impede the same for purposes of exonerating the adversely mentioned defendants in my broad lawsuit including the current President Ruto courtesy of his AMACO-INSURANCE Company, ex-President Uhuru and former Premior Raila.

                                                                                                                    Thank you in advance for your considerations.

                                                                                                                     Yours Faithfully,

                                                                                                                     Erick Mango

                                                                                       

LINKS

-( https://erick-mango.blogspot.com/2022/11/red-flags-on-transparency-and-contempt.html )

-( https://startrextraterrestrials.wordpress.com/2022/11/16/red-flags-on-transparency-and-contempt-complaint-cc-pe-aug-22-36-sos-i-squeezed-final-submission-vol-12-subject-to-deadline-extension-to-the-acc-secretariat-ombudsman-kisumu-pdf-attachment-back/ )

-( https://erick-mango.blogspot.com/2022/11/prosecution-counsel-peninnah-ngondi.html ) ;

-( https://startrextraterrestrials.wordpress.com/2022/11/17/prosecution-counsel-peninnah-ngondi-wawira-in-the-odpp-plea-to-avail-by-office-messenger-or-otherwise-the-three-hard-copy-documentary-evidences-to-the-advocates-complaints-commission-secretary-senior/ )

From: leah.mutua <leah.mutua@ag.go.ke>

To: erickmango2006 <erickmango2006@yahoo.com>

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 at 04:02:10 PM GMT+3

Subject: ACC COMPLAINT-CC/PE/AUG/22/36

Good afternoon,

Kindly find attached our response to your complaint a lodged with the Advocates Complaints Commission.

 Yours Faithfully,

Leah M. Mutua

Senior State Counsel, Advocates Complaints Commission

A: Cooperative House, 20th Floor, Haile Selassie Avenue

P: P.O Box 48048-00100, Nairobi.

E: leah.mutua@ag.go.ke

                                                                   REPUBLIC OF KENYA

                                                     OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

                                                                                  &

                                                            DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

YOUR REF: TBA                                                                                          Date: 18/11/2022

OUR REF: CC/PE/AUG/22/36 (6833)

ERICK MANGO OTIENO

P.O BOX 184-40400

SUNA, MIGORI

"Via Email; erickmango2006@yahoo.com "

Dear Sir,

RE: YOUR COMPLAINT AGAINST OWADE & CO. ADVOCATES AND MUDEYI

ALBERT OKUMU, ADVOCATE

We write making reference to the above matter being your complaint lodged with

the Commission on 19TH August 2022.

Upon perusal of your complaint, we noted that your complaint was against two

advocates as mentioned herein above for their failure to prosecute your accident

claim on time and thus leading to frustration resulting from their breach of duty of

care to you as the client.

We did also peruse your submissions as received and wrote to you vide our letters

dated 5/9/2022 and 20/9/2022 as well as our tele-conversation with you on

14/11/2022. In our letters we emphasized that you:-

1. Avail proof of payment of the legal fees to the advocate(s).

2. Documentary evidence to substantiate your claims against the said advocates.

3. Avail proof of advocate-client relationship between yourself and the

advocates.

4. You are knowledgeable of our mandate as the Commission as per section 53 of

the Advocates Act CAP 16.

We herein issue our response as follows:-

The Mandate of the Advocates Complaints Commission

The Advocates Complaints Commission is established under Section 53 of the

Advocates Act to enquire into complaints against advocates, Law firms and their

employees. After due enquiry, we are mandated to either: reject the complaint,

promote reconciliation and/or encourage and facilitate an amicable settlement or, if a

disciplinary offence that is serious or aggravated is disclosed, to file a complaint before

the Disciplinary Tribunal.

The Act further explains in subsection 4 that it is within the mandate of the

Commission '...to receive and consider a complaint made by any person, regarding

the conduct of any advocate.... if it appears to the Commission that there is no

substance in the complaint it shall reject the same forthwith; if it appears to the

Commission whether before or after investigation that there is substance in the

complaint but that the matter complained of constitutes or appears to constitute a

disciplinary offence it shall forthwith refer the matter to the Disciplinary Committee; if

it appears to the Commission that there is substance in the complaint but that it does

not constitute a disciplinary offence it shall forthwith notify the person;.... if it

appears to the Commission that there is substance in a complaint but that the

circumstances of the case do not disclose a disciplinary offence with which the

Disciplinary Committee can properly deal and that the Commission itself should not

deal with the matter but that the proper remedy for the complainant is to refer the

matter to the courts for appropriate redress the Commission shall forthwith so advise

the complainant.'

During our tele-conversation with the complainant on 14th November 2022, I

informed you that all complaints received by the Commission must first pass through

the sieve to ensure that they have 'merit' or as described above, 'substance'. Upon

receipt of any complaint lodged within the Commission, it is within the mandate of

the Commission to 'weigh' whether each and every complaint falls within the

threshold of what can be pursued as 'professional misconduct' against an advocate,

law firm or its employees. For the Commission to decide whether or not a complaint

has 'merit' or 'substance' the same is weighed based on the 'evidence' adduced

otherwise what would make a complaint worth of pursuit stand out from any other

allegation made by anyone against another? The Commission in its implementation of

its mandate relies entirely on evidence in determining whether or not a complaint

falls within the constraints of what the Commission deals with, being, allegations

against advocates for acts of professional misconduct.

You have been informed and reminded of our mandate in our letters to you and the

importance of documentary evidence. Complaints without evidence are merely

allegations without proof.

Proof of Payment

An advocate, as in any other profession, is entitled to legal fees for professional

services rendered within the course of his professional duty. Section 46 of the

Advocates Act explains more in Advocate's remuneration and further states that '...

such agreement shall be valid and binding on the parties PROVIDED IT IS IN

WRITING and signed by the client or his agent duly authorized in that behalf.'

In the Help Form filed and signed by yourself on 18th August 2022, you indicated that

you had paid the advocate legal fees but then went ahead to state that it was an

'..abuse of the court process to ask for proof of payment of legal fees...' Take note

that 'He who alleges must prove'.

Kindly note that proof of payment in your case would act as evidence that you

indeed instructed the advocate, paid a retainer fee for which the Commission would

then have authority to inquire from the advocate(s)under which circumstances had

he/they received the money paid by you. We wish to reiterate that 'merit' or

'substance' is sourced from evidence, which in this case, is missing.

Establishment of Advocate-Client Relationship

It is imperative that you establish an advocate client relationship while lodging a

complaint against 'your' advocate for acts of professional misconduct. In the event

legal fees were not paid and/or a written fee agreement is lacking, one is able to

establish the same by way of correspondences between yourself as the client and the

advocate discussing matter to do with the brief.

You allegedly instructed advocates to render professional legal services on your behalf

in exchange for legal fees but you have failed to establish existence of instructions/

advocate-client relationship between yourself and the advocate (s).

Tort of professional Negligence and Liability

In your submissions, you further indicated that , 'My complaint's grounded in the tort

of professional negligence and liability...'noting to cite the decision of the court in

'Blyth vs Birmingham, read together with the breach of duty of care '...since their

professional misconducts failed to meet the statutory requirement-thresholds set by

law...' We wish to reiterate as herein above that the mandate of the Commission as

lying within section 53 of the Advocates Act is to deal with complaints against

advocates, law firms or their employees for acts of professional misconduct, not tort.

Further, your allegation has not be backed by any evidence authorizing us to inquire

deeper into the complaint, thus lacking 'substance'.

CONCLUSION

It is noteworthy that you have failed, neglected and refused to cooperate with the

Commission for purposes of your complaint as clearly shown in your submissions. We

have (in our communication to you) narrowed down what the Commission would

need to pursue your complaint further but you have been insistent on explaining why

what we have requested from you is not necessary. The Advocates Complaints

Commission is governed not only by the Advocates Act but also the Constitution of

Kenya as read together with other laws allowing the Commission to act within the

confines of the Law governing it. The Commission is required to accept complaints

from the public however, the complaints are scrutinized to ensure that they fall within

the limits of the law, thereby giving them 'substance' or 'merit' or lack thereof. It is

also within the mandate of the Commission pursuant to Section 53(4)(a) of the Act to

reject a complaint lacking in merit. This complaint as is lacks merit which results from

the lack of evidence and is therefore rejected. You are at liberty to appeal the decision

of the Commission by exercising your rights as under Section 53(8) of the Advocates

Act CAP 16 or personally prosecute your complaint before the Disciplinary Committee

as under Section 60 (1) of the Advocates Act or seek redress from the courts. Further

take note that the Commission is not a court or the Disciplinary Committee. The

Commission works with the Disciplinary Committee in prosecuting complaints and

thus the court procedure dictates the operations of the Commission while at the

Prosecution stage/before the Committee but not at the preliminary stages upon

receipt of complaints.

Take note that we shall proceed to close our file.

Yours faithfully,

FOR: COMMISSION SECRETARY,

ADVOCATES COMPLAINTS COMMISSION.

Leah M. Mutua

Senior State Counsel.