Farida Idris Mohamed, the Group Commercial Director at Capital FM, appeared before Milimani Chief Magistrate Lucas Onyina on April 18, 2023, to face seven counts of threatening to kill her former partner and business associate, Hussein Aila Amaro.
The charges stem from a series of explicit text messages allegedly sent by Idris to Amaro on June 14 and 15, 2019.
Photo Courtesy: Farida Idris Pausing for a photo
The prosecution presented messages purportedly sent from Idris’s Safaricom line, containing graphic threats. One such message read: “I will kill you with my hands and drag your body on hot tarmac until nobody can recognise that rotten body of yours, then bury you before you proceed to hell.”
Idris pleaded not guilty to all charges. Her defence attorney, Peter Wanyama, argued that the alleged offences occurred during a tumultuous period following the end of a nine-year relationship and business partnership between Idris and Amaro.
Wanyama emphasised that the charges were brought more than four years after the alleged incidents, suggesting that emotions had since settled.
The court granted Idris a cash bail of Ksh100,000 and instructed the prosecution to provide the defence with all relevant witness statements. The case was scheduled for mention on May 8, 2023.
In a related development, Idris has filed a petition in the High Court challenging the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision to pursue the charges.
She contends that the prosecution is an abuse of the judicial process, motivated by a personal vendetta stemming from unresolved business disputes with Amaro. Idris alleges that the criminal proceedings are being used to exert pressure over a civil disagreement involving their jointly owned company, Enersense Solutions Limited.
Conversely, Amaro has petitioned the Public Service Commission to investigate the DPP’s conduct, accusing the office of mishandling the case and failing to consult him before deciding to drop the charges.
He maintains that the threats were serious and that the decision to withdraw the case undermines the rule of law.
The case underscores the complexities that can arise when personal relationships intersect with professional and legal disputes.
