Court bars EACC from summoning judge in Tuju, EADB case

The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) has been barred from summoning or interviewing Commercial Court judge Wayua Mong’are over alleged bribery claims.

The matter relates to a Sh1.9 billion row between former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju and the East Africa Development Bank (EADB). 

Justice Bahati Mwamuye of the High Court yesterday directed the commission and the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) not to conduct searches or seize Justice Mong’are's property.

The judge also ordered that the case be heard in camera and that the parties appear on May 6 for further directions.

EACC had invited the judge to appear before it yesterday after a former judge and a lawyer were nabbed by the commission while allegedly soliciting a bribe for a favourable ruling on the Dari property auction.

Tuju claimed that the two had asked him to part with money so that Justice Wayua would give him a fighting chance against the regional bank to salvage his wealth.

However, the judge argued that it was unfair for the commission to send the invitation letter to the Deputy Registrar, who is her junior, and to single her out in the entire division.

She termed the EACC letter as harassment.

According to her, there is no complaint before the Judicial Service Commission against her, which would prompt EACC to require her to respond.

The judge said she acted in good faith while handling the case. 

“As a judge, I perform my duties and functions in good faith and in the lawful performance of a judicial function. Thus, I am protected under Article 160(5) of the Constitution, which states that as a member of the judiciary, as a judge, I am not liable in action in respect of anything done or omitted to be done in good faith and in the lawful performance of a judicial function,” said Justice Wayua.

In her ruling, Justice Mong’are said the case against EADB, real estate company Knight Frank Valuers and Garam Investment Auctioneers was inviting the court to re-determine issues that had already been previously resolved by different courts.

She upheld the bank’s position that the fresh case could not be heard as it amounted to re-opening the battle found in the United Kingdom and Kenya.

“I find that the bank’s position and objection is well- founded that this application is a blatant abuse of court process, meant to frustrate its lawful recovery efforts after years of default and litigation. There is no way that the plaintiff’s amended plaint dated 25th April 2025 survives, and the same is accordingly struck out,” ruled Justice Mong’are.

In this case, Tuju accused the lender, the auctioneer and the valuer of violating court orders. He told the court that the bank had already sought transfer of the titles of Entim Sidai Wellness Sanctuary, Tamarind Karen and Dari Business Park to Ultra Eureka Ltd. 

He claimed that the auction violated court orders barring EADB from selling the high-end property in a bid to recover a contested Sh1.9 billion.

The former Jubilee Party Secretary General filed two separate cases against the registrar. In the first, he sued the Chief Land Registrar of Nairobi and the Ministry of Lands, Cabinet Secretary.

“It will manifest an unfair administrative action if the respondent proceeds and executes a transfer in favour of a third party while having been served with a valid court order,” his court papers filed before the commercial court in Nairobi read in part. 

Tuju alleged that Jackson Kiplimo Chebett is the director of Ultra Eureka. He added that Kiplimo is also the director of Stabex International Limited, which is allegedly linked to Ultra-Eureka Farm Limited.

Tuju claimed that he had informed the Ministry of Lands about the court order.

 He then filed a second case, this time arguing that Ultra Eureka had informed his tenants that it was the new sheriff.

“Despite full notice of the court orders, which were presented for registration at the Lands

Registry, the plaintiffs have discovered that the Defendants deliberately refused to comply with the said orders, instead proceeding to illegally and irregularly register a transfer by Chargee in favour of the first defendant purportedly on February 18, 2025,” his lawyer Victor Mabachi argued.

According to Tuju, Justice Mong’are had issued orders barring Garam, Knight Frank Valuers and the regional bank disposing of the property dubbed Entim Sidai Wellness Sanctuary and Tamarind Karen and Dari Business Park.

“The said orders preserve the status quo and prevent any further dealings with the subject properties pending the hearing of the plaintiff’s application dated October 25, 2024, which remains undermined,” said Tuju.

On the other hand, EABD, Eureka and Garam asked the court to strike out the case.  They argued that the court had no power to entertain the case. In the alternative, they asked the court to find that it was vexatious and an abuse of court process.