The suspects, identified as Faith Gathoni Njoroge and Tyson Marango Owuor, are attached to KRA’s Upper Hill offices in Nairobi.

According to EACC, the arrests followed a complaint from a taxpayer who alleged that the two officials demanded Sh3 million in exchange for influencing the resolution of a Capital Gains Tax assessment valued at Sh4.5 million.

Following the complaint, anti-graft investigators mounted an operation during which the two suspects were allegedly caught receiving Sh900,000, said to be part of the demanded bribe.

The cash was recovered as evidence and the suspects taken into custody.

EACC said the two are currently being processed at the Integrity Centre as investigations continue.

The Commission indicated that appropriate action will be taken under the Anti-Bribery Act, 2016, upon completion of the investigations.

The post EACC Arrests Two KRA Officers Over Alleged Sh900,000 Bribery Deal appeared first on Insider Bits News.

In the petition, Gachoka wants Patrick Kiage, Aggrey Muchelule, and Lydia Achode removed from offices  on grounds of gross misconduct in their handling of matters connected to the government’s proposed sale of a 15 per cent stake in Safaricom PLC.

Gachoka on Monday escorted his co-petitioner, Samuel Kahara Macharia, to Pensions House in Nairobi, where the petition was formally lodged at the JSC.

 Macharia is himself a petitioner in one of the consolidated High Court constitutional challenges against the share sale in which he named the National Treasury, the Privatization Commission, the Capital Markets Authority, the Attorney General, and Vodafone Group PLC as respondents.

The move marks a significant escalation in a months-long campaign by Gachoka and allied petitioners to block the divestiture of the government’s 15 per cent stake in Safaricom to a South African firm, a transaction expected to raise an estimated Sh204.3 billion.

The JSC petition is directly linked to Court of Appeal Civil Application No. E261 of 2026, in which the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury and Economic Planning and five others are seeking to overturn conservatory orders that blocked the national government from selling Safaricom shares.

Gachoka had already put his concerns in writing before lodging the JSC petition.

Just days ago, he and nine other petitioners wrote to the President of the Court of Appeal seeking clarification over what they termed as an unusual alteration and fast-tracking of the State application.

In a letter through advocate Lempaa Suiyanla of Mugeria, Lempaa and Kariuki Advocates, they raised concerns over the scheduling of the case.

The petitioners said parties were initially served with a hearing notice indicating that the matter would be heard on June 29, 2026.

However, they were later informed of a change fixing it for June 24, and were subsequently served with another amended notice advancing the hearing further to June 18 before a three-judge bench constituted by the President of the Court of Appeal

“It was therefore with considerable surprise that the parties subsequently received an amended hearing notice indicating that the application would instead be heard on June 18 at 9am,” the letter stated, with the petitioners arguing that the abrupt changes had created “genuine concern and apprehension” among the parties.

The petitioners also sought assurances that there exists no predetermined outcomes in Civil Application No. E261 of 2026 and that the matter shall be determined solely on the law and the merits presented by the parties.”

The High Court extended orders restraining the government from selling its 15 per cent shares in Safaricom to Vodacom South Africa, pending determination of three petitions, with a three-judge bench appointed by Chief Justice Martha Koome saying serious fundamental and constitutional issues had been raised.

The petitioners have argued that the proposed transaction would effectively reduce the State to a minority shareholder at 20 per cent in Safaricom, while granting the foreign-owned Vodacom Group controlling majority shares at 55 per cent.

They have further contended that the transaction implicates Kenya’s digital sovereignty and the financial flows underpinning M-Pesa.

Gachoka and other petitioners have also argued that the proposed transaction lacked transparency and was not subjected to independent evaluation, verification, or due diligence to ensure a lawful and competitive sale process, and that allowing the sale to proceed before the petitions are resolved could cause irreversible harm, including the loss of citizen control, dilution of sovereignty, and exposure of sensitive national and personal data.

The litigation has produced multiple satellite applications.

The High Court earlier dismissed applications by Gachoka and Prof. Fredrick Onyango Ogola seeking to bar Senior Counsel John Ohaga and advocate Andrew Mukite Musangi from representing parties in the proceedings, with a three-judge bench finding that the applicants had failed to prove any actual or perceived conflict of interest.

The JSC is the constitutional body mandated under Article 168 of the Constitution to receive and process complaints against judges, with removal proceedings triggered upon a finding of gross misconduct or incompetence.

The petition against Justices Kiage, Muchelule, and Achode has not yet been responded to by the named judges or the Court of Appeal.

The post Petition Filed at JSC to Remove 3 Appeal Judges Over Safaricom Sale Case appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Karua said immigration officials at Entebbe International Airport informed her that she had been flagged under a “red alert” before serving her with a notice declaring her a prohibited immigrant and persona non grata.

Documents issued by Uganda’s Directorate of Citizenship and Immigration Control show that Karua was denied entry under Uganda’s Citizenship and Immigration Control Act and ordered to be returned to Kenya on the next available flight.

The notice, dated June 22, 2026, identifies Karua as a Kenyan national and states that she was denied entry on grounds that she was considered “persona non grata.”

Addressing journalists upon arrival at JKIA, Karua displayed the immigration notice and questioned the basis of the decision, saying she had travelled to Uganda in her capacity as an advocate.

Her deportation comes amid heightened political tensions in Uganda and days after several developments involving the legal team representing veteran Ugandan opposition leader Kizza Besigye.

Karua has been part of Besigye’s defence team in ongoing court proceedings in Kampala.

Earlier on Monday, the Uganda Law Society confirmed that Karua had initially been cleared at Entebbe before immigration officials reversed the decision and barred her from entering the country. According to the society, she was subsequently ordered to return to Kenya.

Ugandan authorities had not publicly explained the alleged “red alert” by the time of publication.

However, the immigration notice seen by journalists cites only one reason for the denial of entry: “Persona non grata.”

The incident is likely to trigger diplomatic and legal questions, particularly given Karua’s role as counsel in ongoing cases involving Ugandan opposition figures.

In recent weeks, members of Besigye’s legal team have reported arrests, restrictions and legal challenges linked to the high-profile treason proceedings facing the opposition leader.

The Senior Counsel Bar of Kenya had earlier condemned Karua’s detention at Entebbe, describing it as a violation of her rights and interference with her professional duties as an advocate representing a client before Ugandan courts.

Further details are expected as Karua addresses the circumstances surrounding her deportation and possible next legal steps.

The post Martha Karua Returns to Kenya After Uganda Denies Her Entry, Declares Her Persona Non Grata appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The Bar through its Chairman, Senior Counsel Philip Murgor, says Karua was detained while in Uganda to attend the court mention and bail ruling of Hon. Erias Lukwago and has been denied access to her lawyers, defence team and family.

The Senior Counsel Bar said the detention and threatened deportation of Karua violated her rights and amounted to interference with her duties as an advocate representing a client before a Ugandan court.

The Bar has demanded that Karua be granted immediate access to her lawyers, family and the Kenyan diplomatic mission, while calling for any deportation process to be halted pending lawful determination.

The statement further urged the diplomatic missions of Kenya and the international community, alongside relevant United Nations Special Procedures, to urgently intervene in the matter.

The Senior Counsel Bar of Kenya demanded “the immediate and unconditional release of Hon. Martha Karua SC, and non-interference as she goes about her duties in Uganda and elsewhere as a duly accredited advocate to appear before a Ugandan Court to represent an accused person.”

The post Martha Karua Detention: Senior Counsel Bar Demands Release appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Government Spokesperson Isaac Mwaura made the clarification today, emphasizing continuity of economic activities and warning against any attempts to disrupt normalcy.

“June 25 will be a normal working day. There is no holiday declaration and all Kenyans have been asked to report to their working places. Politicians planning to take advantage of the Gen Z commemoration to cause chaos have been put on notice,” Mwaura stated.

He added that the government has put in enough mechanisms to protect businesses across the country and maintain law and order.

The clarification comes ahead of planned peaceful marches and vigils marking the second anniversary of the 2024 Gen Z-led protests against the Finance Bill, which turned deadly with dozens of deaths and injuries. Similar commemorations occurred in 2025.

Organizers, including families of victims, activists, and opposition leaders, have notified police of intentions to hold marches to Parliament to demand justice, compensation, and accountability for those killed.Siaya Governor James Orengo has called for the day to be observed as a public holiday.

“Mark your calendars: June 25th will be observed as a Public Holiday. No work, no school!” Orengo declared.

He invited Kenyans to participate: “We invite all Kenyans, mothers, fathers, siblings and friends to march to Parliament to demand justice and lay flowers where our children’s lives were cruelly taken.” Parallel vigils are planned across all 47 counties.

President William Ruto has reinforced the government’s position on normal operations.

“Children will go to school because it is their right, workers will go to work, and businesses will open their businesses so that we grow our economy,” Ruto said.

“We must never allow things that take Kenya backwards… We will defend the rights of everybody because we are a country that believes in order, we are a civilised country, an organised society that believes in the rule of law.”

He warned against mobilization for destruction of property or chaos.

The government has assured that peaceful assemblies will be facilitated under the Constitution while security agencies remain vigilant against violence or infiltration by those seeking political mileage ahead of the 2027 elections.

Police have set conditions for any processions to ensure they remain peaceful and have engaged organizers accordingly. A Sh2 billion compensation framework for protest victims has been announced in coordination with relevant bodies.

Businesses, schools, and public services are expected to operate normally on June 25.

The government has stressed its commitment to protecting lives, property, and economic stability while upholding citizens’ rights to peaceful expression and remembrance.

As tensions build, authorities have reiterated that any attempts to incite unrest or exploit the commemorations for chaos will not be tolerated. Kenyans are urged to prioritize peace, productivity, and the rule of law as the nation marks this sensitive date.

Further updates on security arrangements are expected in the coming days.

The post Government Confirms June 25 as Normal Working Day, No Public Holiday Declared appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Justice Patricia Nyaundi of the Milimani Constitutional and Human Rights Division ruled on Monday that CS Duale wilfully disobeyed conservatory orders issued on May 28, 2026, and confirmed on June 2, 2026.

The judge ordered Duale to personally appear before the court on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 11am for mitigation and sentencing following the contempt finding.

“On account of the foregoing, I find that in commissioning the ongoing construction of the facility at Laikipia, the 2nd Respondent (CS Ministry of Health) is in continuing contempt of the orders of the Court that issued on 28th May 2026 and confirmed on 2nd June 2026,” Justice Nyaundi ruled.

“Accordingly, the 2nd respondent (CS Health Duale) is required to attend Court on June 23, 2026 at 11am for mitigation and sentencing.”

While finding that the government disobeyed court orders, Justice Nyaundi said court directives are commands that must be obeyed and cannot be avoided through technical manoeuvres or by changing the actors involved.

“The obligation to comply attaches to the office holder personally, and it is the substance of the restrained conduct, not the identity of the collaborators, that determines contempt,” she said.

The court found that Duale, knowing that all construction activities at Laikipia Airbase had been stopped, proceeded with the project by attempting to alter the composition of those involved rather than halting the restrained conduct.

“Knowing full well that the Court required all construction activities at Laikipia Airbase to cease, he persuaded himself that he could continue by altering the composition of the actors rather than the substance of the conduct,” the court stated.

Justice Nyaundi added that Duale’s public statements, which were widely reported and never disavowed, supported the conclusion that he intended construction to continue despite the court orders.

“His public statements, widely reported and never disavowed, reinforce the conclusion that he intended construction to proceed notwithstanding the Court’s Orders,” she ruled.

The summons followed a contempt application filed by Katiba Institute and the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), accusing the government of brazenly defying court orders by allowing construction at the Nanyuki airbase to proceed and failing to disclose key documents relating to the Kenya-US arrangement behind the project.

The court heard that Duale had publicly stated, both in Parliament and during media appearances, that construction of the quarantine centre would proceed despite what he described as “noise”.

The court noted that on June 3, 2026, reports indicated that despite the orders, flights carrying medical equipment and specialised personnel had landed at Laikipia Airbase. Data presented before the court showed that at least six military aircraft, including C-130 and C-17 transport planes, had landed in Nanyuki since May 24, 2026, with three arriving after the court orders were issued.

Justice Nyaundi rejected Duale’s defence that any ongoing construction was part of Kenya’s independent national Ebola preparedness programme and had no connection to the suspended bilateral collaboration with the United States.

“As I understand it, what the CS seeks to do is to avoid compliance by recasting or recharacterising the ongoing construction,” the judge held.

“A court order is not an invitation to ingenuity; it is a command to be obeyed. Attempts to re-label or re-describe conduct so as to place it outside the reach of an order do not assist a respondent; the court looks to the substance of what was done, not the gloss placed upon it,” she stated.

The court, however, cleared Attorney General Dorcas Oduor of the contempt charge relating to disclosure, finding that the obligation under the earlier orders attached solely to Duale as Cabinet Secretary and that the AG could not be sanctioned for acts of her clients.

Following the ruling, Katiba Institute welcomed the decision, saying the court had affirmed the importance of respecting judicial orders and upholding constitutional safeguards in government projects.

The organisation said disclosures made during the proceedings raised questions over how the project was initiated without key assessments and public accountability measures being undertaken.

Katiba Institute Executive Director Nora Mbagathi said the ruling reinforced the need for public institutions to operate within the law.

“We are witnessing a profound disrespect for Kenya’s sovereignty and our constitutional rule of law,” Mbagathi said.

“The fact that construction continued in direct violation of a High Court order shows that the government believed it could operate entirely above the Kenyan judicial system. Today’s ruling sends a clear message: public health initiatives must bow to constitutional accountability, transparency, and the rule of law.”

Katiba Institute maintained that the case was not opposed to public health preparedness but sought to ensure government projects comply with constitutional requirements, including transparency, accountability and lawful decision-making.

The institute called for an immediate halt to all activities at the Laikipia Airbase site pending further directions from the court.

President William Ruto had publicly acknowledged approving the arrangement after a request from US President Donald Trump, describing it as a partnership “with friends who have walked with Kenya for 30 to 40 years.”

The post Health CS Duale found in contempt of court over Laikipia Ebola facility, ordered to appear for sentencing Tuesday appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The directive was issued by Magistrate Okore at the Milimani Anti-Corruption Court after EACC informed the court that Analo did not comply with instructions requiring him to report to the commission on June 19, 2026.

The matter, filed as EACC versus Patrick Analo Akivaga, E787 of 2026, came up for mention to confirm compliance with court orders issued on June 17, 2026.

EACC is investigating allegations that Analo received more than Sh170 million through suspicious cash and M-Pesa deposits between 2020 and 2026, with the funds suspected to be linked to conflict of interest, abuse of office and bribery-related dealings.

According to the anti-graft agency, preliminary investigations revealed that Analo accumulated “immense wealth which is not commensurate to his known legitimate source of income.”

The investigation followed a search operation conducted by EACC officers on June 4, 2026, after obtaining court warrants.

During the operation, investigators recovered approximately Sh65 million in cash from a residence linked to Analo and his wife, Damaris Sindavi Kayugira.

EACC said the recovery comprised Sh51.3 million in Kenyan currency and 113,000 US dollars, estimated at about Sh14 million.

In a separate earlier High Court matter, Justice Rose Ougo issued preservation orders freezing bank accounts belonging to Analo and his wife for six months as EACC continued investigations into allegations of unexplained wealth, conflict of interest and corruption.

The frozen accounts hold about Sh16.9 million, with the funds preserved pending completion of investigations and possible recovery proceedings.

During the June 19 court proceedings before Magistrate Okore, EACC informed the court that it had complied with part of the orders issued earlier, including filing a further affidavit of return and serving Analo’s advocate with documents already filed before court.

The commission, however, told the court it was yet to comply with an order requiring the EACC Chief Executive Officer to appoint an officer to facilitate communication between the commission and Analo’s legal team.

EACC urged the court to set aside some of the earlier directives, arguing they were based on claims by the respondent that were not supported by evidence.

The commission disputed allegations that it had invited Analo for statement recording but failed to communicate with his advocate.

EACC told the court that if Analo was required for further questioning, he would receive a formal invitation together with his advocate.

“The Commission will do a formal invitation to him and his advocate on record and provide details of the Commission’s contact person together,” EACC submitted.

Analo’s lawyers urged the court to compel EACC to comply with the earlier directives, warning that failure to do so could expose the commission to contempt proceedings.

“The Commission ought to comply with the law or may be liable for contempt,” the defence submitted.

The lawyers further informed the court that their client had received calls from unknown persons claiming to be EACC officers and asked the court to intervene.

They also requested that Analo be allowed to report to EACC on June 24, instead of June 19, citing illness.

Magistrate Okore allowed Analo, accompanied by his advocate, to present himself before EACC on June 24 for purposes of extension of his police bond.

The court directed him to provide a medical report to confirm his inability to appear on June 19.

“The respondent should also supply his medical report to EACC for the purposes of confirming his unavailability on 19/6/26,” the court ordered.

The matter will be mentioned on June 25, 2026, to confirm compliance with the court directions.

The post Court Orders Suspended Nairobi County Official Analo to Report to EACC by June 24 Over Sh170 Million Probe appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The court’s recent decision by Justice Josephine Mongare of Machakos High Court  is a dramatic reversal of fortune for the high-profile deal after four consecutive failed attempts to halt it in Nairobi courts this year.

Justice Mongare issued the interim orders restraining the Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK), Diageo Kenya Limited, and three other respondents  stopping any steps toward completing the transaction pending the hearing of a petition filed by Christine Irungu.

“In the interim and pending the inter partes hearing and determination of this Application, a conservatory order is hereby issued restraining the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents, whether by themselves, their directors, officers, agents, servants, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates or any person acting on their behalf, from completing, implementing, registering, approving, transferring, disposing of or otherwise giving effect to the sale and/or transfer of Diageo’s controlling interest in East African Breweries PLC to Asahi Group Holdings Limited,” Justice Mongare ordered

Justice Mongare further ordered that the current ownership structure at EABL remain unchanged until the case is heard.

“A conservatory order is hereby issued preserving the ownership, control and shareholding status quo in East African Breweries PLC as regards the CAK and Diageo Kenya Limited controlling interest therein,” She ordered.

Judge Mongare further certified as urgent a petition filed by Irungu and directed that the application be served upon the respondents within seven days and fixed the matter for mention on July 2, 2026.

The recent orders come barely hours after the High Court in Nairobi dismissed a separate attempt by JILK Construction Company to stop the same transaction.

In that case, Justice Gregory Mutai of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division rejected JILK Construction’s application for conservatory orders, finding that the company’s grievances arising from a terminated 2017 Kisumu brewery construction contract had no connection to the proposed share sale.

“I share the same view as my brother Judge Bahati Mwamuye in the Bia Tosha matter, that no nexus has been shown between the impugned transaction and the petition now before the court,” Justice Mutai ruled.

JILK had argued that the acquisition should be suspended pending a human rights audit under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

However, the court held that the principles did not have binding legal force capable of stopping the transaction.

Justice Mutai further held that public interest favored completion of the deal.

“In my view, public interest favors the conclusion of the transaction, as the transaction shall have a significant public finance impact,” the judge said, noting that the transaction could generate approximately Sh42 billion in Capital Gains Tax revenue.

The JILK case was one of several legal challenges mounted against the proposed acquisition this year.

Earlier, Bia Tosha Distributors, a former EABL distributor locked in a decade-old distribution rights dispute, had three injunction bids thrown out, the last as recently as June 2, when Justice Mutai dismissed its application, ruling that had elected to pursue relief at the Court of Appeal and could not return to the High Court to seek similar orders.

The transaction had been awaiting final approval from the Competition Authority of Kenya after reportedly receiving clearance from regulators in Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority.

The transaction, valued at approximately $2.3 billion (Sh340 billion), would see Asahi acquire Diageo’s 65 per cent controlling stake in the Nairobi Securities Exchange-listed brewer.

The deal, announced in December 2025, had been awaiting final approval from the Competition Authority of Kenya after reportedly receiving clearance from regulators in Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority.

The deal is expected to generate approximately Sh42 billion in capital gains tax for the Exchequer, making it one of Kenya Revenue Authority’s biggest single-transaction windfalls.

EABL had repeatedly told investors that completion was expected in the second half of 2026.

At the time of going to press, CAK, EABL and Diageo had not filed responses or issued public statements on the Machakos order.

The post Machakos Court Temporarily Halts Sh340 Billion EABL Share Sale appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The High Court Civil Division ruled that sharing the allegations among colleagues damaged the plaintiff’s reputation and that attempts to distance oneself by stating that the information was only an allegation or that investigations were ongoing could not shield a person from liability.

The court found that defamatory content does not cease to be defamatory merely because it is presented as a report of accusations.

In the judgment, the court held that statements such as “it is alleged” and references to ongoing investigations are not a complete defence where the publication exposes a person to reputational harm.

The dispute arose after messages were posted in a WhatsApp group comprising senior URA officials, where allegations were made linking the plaintiff to a shooting incident allegedly arising from a dispute involving a “skirt”.

The plaintiff sued, arguing that the statements portrayed him as a person involved in criminal conduct and lowered his standing among colleagues and members of the public.

The court agreed that the publication was defamatory, holding that repeating allegations made by another person can still amount to defamation.

The judge noted that a person who republishes damaging claims cannot escape responsibility simply by saying they were repeating what they had heard.

The ruling emphasised the need for caution when sharing unverified accusations, especially within professional forums where information can affect an individual’s reputation, career and relationships.

The court further held that workplace or internal communication platforms, including WhatsApp groups, do not provide automatic protection from defamation claims.

The decision serves as a warning that digital platforms can carry legal consequences when used to circulate statements that harm another person’s reputation.

The High Court awarded the plaintiff UGX 100 million as compensation for the damage caused by the defamatory publication.

The post Man Wins Sh100m After “Shooting Over Skirt” Claims Shared Online appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The appellate judge secured 26 out of 41 votes cast in Monday’s election, defeating Lady Justice Lydia Achode, Justice Patrick Kiage and Lady Justice Agnes Murgor in a race closely watched within legal and judicial circles.

The election attracted all judges serving at the Court of Appeal, delivering a 100 per cent voter turnout.

The secret ballot was supervised by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).

Justice Kairu’s victory marks the end of a succession process triggered by the retirement from office of former Court of Appeal President Justice Daniel Musinga, whose five-year term ended on May 24, 2026.

His election places him at the helm of a court that routinely handles some of the country’s most consequential disputes, including constitutional petitions, election appeals, commercial conflicts and criminal cases.

Moments after being declared the winner, Justice Kairu expressed gratitude to his colleagues for the confidence they had shown in him.

“I am deeply humbled by the trust and confidence reposed in me by my colleagues. I undertake to serve the Court and the people of Kenya with diligence, integrity and fidelity to the Constitution,” he said.

Among judges who participated in the election were Justice Imaana Laibuta, Lady Justice Grace Mumbi Ngugi and Justice Issack Hassan.

The position of President of the Court of Appeal is one of the most influential offices in the Judiciary. Besides presiding over appellate proceedings, the office holder is responsible for the administration and management of the Court of Appeal and plays a critical role in shaping judicial policy and case management.

Justice Kairu assumes office with an extensive legal career spanning private practice, academia, arbitration and judicial service.

He joined the Court of Appeal in 2012 after years in legal practice and alternative dispute resolution. Before his appointment to the bench, he was a partner at Kairu & McCourt Advocates and later worked as an arbitrator and mediator.

A holder of a Master of Laws degree from Boston University, Justice Kairu also earned his law degree from the University of Nairobi and a Diploma in Law from the Kenya School of Law.

His contribution to legal education is equally notable. For more than two decades, he lectured at the University of Nairobi School of Law, teaching Civil Procedure, Banking Law and Alternative Dispute Resolution.

He is also a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and has chaired several Judiciary committees, including the Integrated Court Management System Committee.

Justice Kairu takes over leadership of the Court of Appeal at a time when the Judiciary faces mounting pressure to clear case backlogs and efficiently handle a growing number of high-stakes appeals with significant political, economic and constitutional implications.

The post Judge Gatembu Elected Court of Appeal President After Landslide Victory appeared first on Insider Bits News.