A photo of Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi. The recent court ruling ordered an ex-government worker to surrender assets totaling Ksh114 million and four apartment blocks. The judiciary’s decision comes after accusations of financial irregularities by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC). PHOTO: THE JUDICIARY.
In Summary:
- Ex-Nairobi County Finance Officer directed by the Court of Appeal to surrender Ksh114 million, a maisonette, four apartment blocks, and two pieces of land.
- Despite claims of legitimate income sources, the couple faces forfeiture of unexplained assets; court upholds the surrender order.
Feb 12 (TopNews) – A former Nairobi County Finance Officer has been instructed by the Court of Appeal to surrender assets worth millions, including Ksh114 million in cash, a maisonette, four apartment blocks, and two pieces of land.
The court ruling, issued by judges Ali Aroni, John Mutivo, and Laibuta Kibaya, directs the former employee and his wife to forfeit the listed properties deemed unexplained assets.
- Keep Reading:
- Tragic Accident: Baby Dies After Being Mistakenly Put in Oven, Mother Charged
- Trump to NATO Allies: Pay Your Dues or Risk Russian Aggression
- International Outcry: Trump’s NATO Remarks Draw Criticism from Western Officials
The couple faced accusations from the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) of receiving funds exceeding their known income through bank accounts. EACC’s investigation revealed significant cash transactions and assets, prompting suspicion of theft.
Despite claims of legitimate income sources, the court upheld the surrender order for the assets.
“We further order and direct the payment by the appellants of the current market value of the assets listed or forfeiture in place of payment to the Government of Kenya of the current value of the said assets forthwith,” the ruling stated.
This directive highlights the court’s insistence on the surrender of the assets or their equivalent value to the Kenyan government.
The accused individuals, however, contested the allegations, arguing that the inflow of cash into their accounts should be attributed to third-party deposits, not personal transactions.
They disputed the notion that the funds represented interbank transfers, fixed deposits, or loans, as suggested by the EACC’s findings.
“The appellants claimed that the cash inflow ought to constitute funds deposited into an account by third parties,” part of the court documents revealed.
Despite their explanations, the court maintained its decision regarding the surrender of assets.