Former diplomat contests his imprisonment in Kenya for murder

Dwight Sagaray, a former diplomat who was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for the murder of acting Venezuelan ambassador in Kenya, Olga Fonseca, has appealed his conviction. He claims that the trial judge, Roselyn Korir, made a mistake by relying on an unsubstantiated note that was allegedly issued by the Venezuelan ministry concerning the waiver of his diplomatic immunity. He also argues that the note was not procedurally procured.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) states that all diplomats are immune from criminal proceedings in their host country. If they are to be charged, their immunity must first be waived.

Sagaray’s Arguments

Sagaray argues that the trial court misapplied the principles of diplomatic immunity as outlined in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Privileges and Immunities Act. He claims that his trial and conviction were therefore illegal and null.

The Murder of Olga Fonseca

Olga Fonseca was strangled to death on July 26, 2012, less than two weeks after arriving in Kenya to head the diplomatic mission. Her body was found lying on her bed with a wire cord around her neck, hands and legs. Next to her body was a pair of pliers.

Sagaray’s Conviction

Dwight Sagaray was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years in prison by Judge Korir in 2013. The judge said that the evidence produced in court by the prosecution demonstrated there was an outright conflict between Olga and Dwight. That glaring conflict provided the motive to eliminate Olga.

Sagaray’s Appeal

Sagaray is appealing his conviction on the grounds that the trial judge:

• Relied on an unsubstantiated note that was allegedly issued by the Venezuelan ministry concerning the waiver of his diplomatic immunity.
• Did not procedurally procure the note.
• Misapplied the principles of diplomatic immunity as outlined in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Privileges and Immunities Act.
• Ignored crucial and material facts and failed to objectively consider the totality of the evidence, thereby arriving at an unjust decision.

The Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal will schedule a hearing date for Sagaray’s appeal. The court will then decide whether to uphold the conviction, overturn it, or order a retrial.