The Judiciary has strongly reprimanded former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju for publicly discussing his ongoing legal battle over his sh 4.5 billion Karen properties, urging him to stop litigating the case through media outlets
The stern warning comes as Tuju continued media statements about his long-running legal battle with the East African Development Bank (EADB), which is seeking to auction his properties to recover a over Sh 2.2 billion debt.
Paul Ndemo, the newly appointed Judiciary spokesperson on Thursday March 27,2025, expressed concern that Tuju’s media appearances and public commentary could interfere with the fair administration of justice since the matters are pending in court.
” The courts must be allowed to function without interference from public commentary,” Ndemo stated
In a statement, Ndemo stressed that all legal proceedings should remain in the hands of the judicial system, free from external influence or public pressure.
“The Judiciary urges all individuals and institutions involved in legal cases to respect the process and refrain from making public comments that may compromise the integrity of ongoing court matters,” Ndemo said.
“It is important for the public to trust in the judicial system and let the courts do their work without undue pressure from external sources.”
Tuju, who has served in various senior government roles, including as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, has been embroiled in a bitter legal dispute over properties in the upscale Karen suburb of Nairobi linked to his company, Dari Limited.
The case revolves around over Sh 2.2 billion debt owed to EADB, which has taken multiple steps to recover the money, including efforts to auction Tuju’s Karen properties.
In October 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed Tuju’s application to halt the takeover of his Karen property due to unpaid debts totaling approximately Sh2.2 billion.
The court, led by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu and Justices Njoki Ndungu, Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala, and William Ouko, ruled that EADB could compensate Tuju if necessary.
Following this decision, Tuju and his family members, including Mano, Alma, and Yma, filed multiple appeals and petitions, including cases before the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
Despite these efforts, the properties have faced continued attempts at auction, with valuations and legal proceedings remaining contentious.
Tuju’s troubles started in 2019 when EADB filed legal proceedings in the United Kingdom, where a court ruled in favor of the bank, ordering Dari Limited and its guarantors, including Tuju, to pay the debt.
Subsequently, EADB sought to have this judgment recognized and enforced in Kenya.
The High Court agreed, registering the UK ruling as a Kenyan judgment in January 2020, paving the way for its enforcement locally.
Despite attempts by Tuju and his legal team to challenge the recognition of the UK judgment, the High Court dismissed their application in February 2020, and the Court of Appeal upheld the decision in April 2023.
With the matter still unresolved, Tuju sought to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, but the court recused itself from hearing the case following allegations of bias.
Dissatisfied with Supreme Court’s decision, Tuju has also filed the case before the East African Court of Justice (EACJ), where he claims that EADB’s actions violate the principles of the East African Community (EAC) Treaty.
This matter remains pending, further complicating the legal situation.
In September 2024, Tuju’s legal team also filed an application in the High Court to stop the auction of the properties. The case is still pending determination.
Tuju has recently been making statement and interviews against the judges of the Supreme Court with the recent being on Tuesday where he stated that he had he had tendered a dossier to the EACC regarding the judges who handled his case accusing them of bias and misconduct.
In response to Tuju’s public statements regarding these legal matters, Ndemo reiterated the Judiciary’s position on media litigation.
“Public discourse on ongoing cases can lead to misinformation and may influence the course of justice,” Ndemo remarked in his statement.
Ndemo reminded both the public and the media of the importance of adhering to the sub judice rule, which prohibits public commentary on matters that are actively before the courts.
“Litigating cases in the media is not only inappropriate but can also undermine the judicial process,” Ndemo added.
“We call on all parties, including the media, to exercise caution when reporting on ongoing legal cases and to ensure that they accurately represent the facts.”
