Maina, an advocate who previously worked at Loitiptip’s Kilimani office, took the stand as the prosecution’s first witness, detailing his role in facilitating a transaction that police later flagged as fraudulent.

In testimony before Senior Principal Magistrate Paul Mutai on February 10, 2026, Lawyer Maina recounted how the former senator called him on August 3, 2022, with specific instructions to prepare sale agreements for a Toyota Land Cruiser registered as KDA 005C.

“He told me he wanted to sell his vehicle and asked me to originate the sale agreements and share them on WhatsApp so that they could be forwarded to the buyer,” Maina told the court.

The advocate said Loitiptip then directed him to a house in Kileleshwa, where he found the senator already present with the buyer, Samson Mutina Malonza, and another unidentified individual.

Maina testified that he acted for both parties in the transaction, witnessing the exchange of cash amounting to Sh3 million, half of the agreed Sh6 million purchase price, which was handed directly to Loitiptip.

“The balance was to be paid the same day and that is when the vehicle would be released,” he said.

Central to the case was a motor vehicle registration certificate bearing serial number K4250950P, which was presented during the transaction and indicated Loitiptip as the registered owner.

The logbook showed it had been issued on August 25, 2017.

However, Maina’s involvement took a dramatic turn when he received a call from a police officer asking him to report to Kilimani Police Station.

“I was informed that the logbook that had been issued was a fake logbook,” he testified.

A second advocate, Daniel Muliro, testified that he had acted for Ramna International Motors, the dealership that originally sold the same vehicle to Loitiptip under a hire purchase agreement in August 2020 for Sh10 million.

Muliro told the court that Loitiptip paid only Sh3.5 million as deposit before allegedly disappearing, leaving a balance of Sh6.5 million unpaid.

“That transfer was impossible because technically the company was still the owner of the vehicle since the full purchase price had not been paid,” Muliro said, explaining that an NTSA search still reflected Ramna International Motors as the registered owner even after a logbook was issued in Loitiptip’s name on October 9, 2020.

The defence challenged both witnesses, arguing their testimony was based on instructions and information from third parties.

Loitiptip, who served as Lamu Senator from 2017 to 2022, faces two counts: making a false motor vehicle registration certificate and fraudulently uttering a forged document to the buyer, both allegedly committed on August 3, 2022.

The case will be mentioned for further hearing on March 26, 2026.

The post Advocate Tells Courts How Ex-Senator Allegedly Sold Car Using Forged Logbook appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Behind the polished mahogany desks and leather-bound law books, Kenya’s legal profession hides a dirty secret: your daughter’s mentor might be her predator.

They call it “mentorship.” Buy her coffee. Discuss her career prospects over dinner. Offer to introduce her to the right people.

Then comes the hand on the thigh. The late-night texts. The quid pro quo whispered behind closed office doors.

Welcome to Kenya’s legal profession, where justice is blind, but allegedly, so are those who should be watching the watchdogs.

On Friday February 13,2026, law students, pupil advocates, and young lawyers stormed the Law Society of Kenya headquarters along Gitanga Road, armed with vuvuzelas, placards, and years of suppressed rage.

Their message? The same men who prosecute rapists in court are allegedly running their own harassment rings in the office.

She’s 24, fresh from law school, drowning in student loans, desperate for pupillage.

He’s 55, senior partner, connections at State House,  decides who gets articles and who gets shown the door.

Do the math.

Sexual harassment has been normalized within the profession, buried under fear, power, and intimidation, and disguised as mentorship, the protesters declared.

“The senior advocate offering to ‘personally oversee your training’? Run,” said one participant, summarizing the sentiment of many young lawyers.

The numbers are chilling. In one case involving allegations against a senior lawyer, twenty-two colleagues were reportedly harassed, but only one complainant formally joined the complaint.

Twenty-one women chose their careers over justice, calculating that speaking up would cost more than staying silent.

That’s not a legal profession. That’s a protection racket.

Here’s the kicker: The Law Society of Kenya says it cannot directly intervene in sexual harassment complaints, citing the independence of the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal.

And the Tribunal? In a November 2025 ruling, it determined it lacked jurisdiction over sexual harassment cases, declaring that police and courts should prosecute such matters as criminal offenses.

“The Tribunal says go to the police. The police say bring evidence,” one protester said.

“The evidence is often our word against a senior counsel with connections. Checkmate.”

The young lawyers vowed to take the fight to court to seek justice for victims  because apparently, irony isn’t dead.

They’ll have to use the same legal system that failed to protect them to prosecute the same men who trained them.

LSK President Faith Odhiambo acknowledged a worrying trend of abuse of power by senior colleagues against junior members, noting that most complaints come from those attached to law firms and non-governmental organizations.

“People hiring you might also be harassing you,” said one advocate.

“Good luck reporting your abuser when he signs your paycheck.”

Sexual harassment allegations have even surfaced in the upcoming LSK presidential race, highlighting the irony that the body meant to clean house struggles to police its own leadership.

At the march, Esther Karanja shared her own painful experience.

“The manner in which my complaint was handled was irregular. This is not a small issue. This is not something to be neglected,” she said.

Lawyer Wycliffe Oyoo stressed the need for an enforceable sexual harassment policy.

“It’s the right time for us to ensure that we have a sexual harassment policy that binds. There is no reason why we have a Sexual Harassment Policy of 2019 that has proven to be toothless.”

Several protestors said they know of colleagues who were too afraid to speak out because they thought saying something would mean professional ruin.

What They’re Demanding

The protesters’ demands were clear:

• A safe, independent reporting mechanism that protects complainants from retaliation.
• A system that does not demand impossible standards of proof.
• Meaningful enforcement of the 2019 Sexual Harassment Policy.

“We march so that future advocates will not have to trade their bodies or dignity for opportunities,” read one rallying statement.

“We march so that reporting harassment will not feel like professional suicide.”

LSK Vice President Mwaura Kabata said complaints have been received and addressed through the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal, though the tribunal sometimes declines jurisdiction because sexual harassment is a criminal offense.

“Cooperation is vital in protecting the profession from behavior that is not only embarrassing but shameful,” Kabata said.

LSK President Odhiambo reiterated the society’s commitment to justice for victims, but protesters stressed they want to see immediate action.

The Society promises collaboration with FIDA-Kenya and the Witness Protection Agency.

But Friday’s protesters aren’t holding their breath. They’ve seen too many complaints buried, too many perpetrators promoted, too many victims forced out while their abusers made senior partner.

So they took to the streets. Vuvuzelas blaring. Placards raised. Official advocate attire worn like armor.

Because if the profession won’t protect them, they’ll protect themselves.

And if the Law Society won’t deliver justice?

Well, they’re lawyers. They know where the courts are.

The profession that prosecutes predators is protecting its own. Now its future is fighting back.

The post Why Young Lawyers in Nairobi Protested Sexual Harassment appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Photos posted on CJ X account show legal heavyweights Philip Murgor SC, Nelson Havi, and Law Society of Kenya President Faith Odhiambo, who many says may have brokered the historic truce between Koome and Ahmednasir.

This wasn’t just another routine meeting. This was the first face-to-face encounter between the CJ and Ahmednasir since the Supreme Court’s controversial ban two years ago, a ban that had sent shockwaves through the legal profession and sparked fierce debates about judicial overreach and freedom of practice.

 “Chief Justice Martha Koome convened a consultative meeting with senior lawyers, including Philip Murgor, Ahmednassir Abdullahi, Nelson Havi, and LSK President Faith Odhiambo, to discuss access to justice,” the message posted on CJ account states.

“The engagement focused on collaboration, tackling corruption, and removing barriers to strengthen efficiency, integrity, and public confidence in the justice system.”

On January 23, 2024, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step of barring Ahmednasir, along with his partners and associates, from appearing before it.

The decision was met with disbelief and outrage in legal circles. How could Kenya’s apex court ban an entire law firm without what many considered justifiable cause?

For two years, the firebrand lawyer Ahmednasir continued his crusade from the sidelines, launching blistering attacks on what he termed “JurisPESA”,his provocative label for alleged corruption in the judiciary.

His social media posts became legendary, mixing legal analysis with scorching criticism that made judges squirm and the public pay attention.

When the Supreme Court finally lifted the ban, thanks to intervention by Paul Muite SC, Fred Ngatia SC, and Dennis Mosota, many expected Ahmednasir to declare victory and return triumphantly to practice.

Instead, he threw down a gauntlet that left even his supporters stunned.

“I have decided NOT TO PRACTICE before the court,” he declared, outlining three non-negotiable demands: an admission of wrongdoing by the Court, addressing his grievances about judicial integrity, and meaningful institutional reforms.

His reasoning? “If I go back to practice before the Supreme Court, who is left to fight against JurisPESA in our courts?”

It was vintage Ahmednasir, defiant, principled, and unwilling to be appeased by what he called “a ploy.”

But then came the CJ’s move. The consultative meeting wasn’t just about mending fences, it was about confronting the elephants in the room: corruption allegations, barriers to justice, and the erosion of public confidence in the courts.

The agenda was ambitious: strengthening collaboration between the LSK and the Judiciary, addressing systemic barriers to justice delivery, and exploring solutions to enhance efficiency, integrity, and the rule of law.

By inviting Ahmednasir to the table alongside other critics like laywer Havi, CJ Koome sent a powerful message: dissent would be heard, not silenced.

The meeting concluded with both sides acknowledging the need for dialogue, though the road ahead remains uncertain.

Ahmednasir’s closing challenge to the CJ, offering his experience as former LSK Chairman and JSC member to help reform the courts, hangs in the air like an unanswered question.

Can the Judiciary reform itself from within? Will the Supreme Court acknowledge its mistakes? And most intriguingly, will Ahmednasir eventually return to practice before the very court he’s sworn to reform?

For now, Kenya’s legal community watches with bated breath as two formidable forces, one wielding the gavel, the other wielding the pen, navigate from feud to what might become the most consequential collaboration in the Judiciary’s fight against corruption.

The war against “JurisPESA” has found an unlikely battlefield: the negotiating table.

The post From Feud to Dialogue: CJ Koome, Havi and Ahmednasir’s Historic Reunion After Two Years appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Harrison Nyende Mumia, 47, who has been in custody for 20 days at Industrial Area Remand Prison made the new demands yesterday when he appeared before Milimani Magistrate Rose Ndombi.

Through his legal team led by lawyer Lempaa Soyianka, Mumia argues that since President Ruto is the main complainant in the matter, the court should compel him to provide a witness statement and testify in the case.

Soyianka further told the court that the defence cannot proceed with the hearing until the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions supplies President Ruto’s witness statement, urging the court to delay fixing a hearing date until the document is availed.

“We cannot meaningfully proceed with this matter without the complainant’s statement, and since the President is the main complainant, we urge the court to compel him to record and supply his witness statement before any hearing date is fixed. He should also be compelled to be called as witness in case,” Soyianka told the court.

The defense team also urged the court for a reduction of bail from Sh 500,000 imposed on Mumia to SH 50,000 claiming the accused is unable to raise the current bail terms.

Mumia’s lawyer Abner Mango told the court that his client has been languishing in custody since his initial appearance before Chief Magistrate Dolphina Alego on January 5, 2026, when he was granted SH 500,000 cash bail or a Sh 1 million bond with surrender of his passport.

“Your honor, the accused appeared before Alego on January 5. Your honour he was released on punitive bail terms of Sh 500,000 cash bail and a bond of a Sh 1 Million with a surrender of his passport. He has not been able to raise the same and he remains incarcerated at Industrial area,” Mango submitted.

The defense is now seeking a drastic reduction of the bail terms from to Sh 50,000 an amount they say the family can afford.

Making his case for bail reduction, Mango argued that Mumia poses no flight risk, pointing out that police knew exactly where to find him when they conducted a raid at his Kangundo Road residence.

“Your honor the accused is not a flight risk he was arrested when the DCI raided his home in Kangundo road so the residence is well known by the IO. He is a respected person in this country and has no where to go. He will be attending this court when required,” Mango told the court.

The defense lawyer further challenged the very foundation of the charges, revealing that the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act is currently under challenge at the Court of Appeal.

“Your honour the offences the accused is charged with computer misuse… the act is under challenge at the court of appeal. Your honour let it not escape the court that the charges against him are political,” Mango argued.

He pleaded with the court not to punish Mumia before he has been found guilty.

“Your honour is in that basis that we pray the accused is granted affordable bail terms so that he is not punished before a court of law finds him guilty. Your honour while incarcerated has been put in risk,” Mango submitted.

The prosecution, however, rejected the defense’s arguments, insisting that bail had already been granted and the accused’s inability to meet the terms was not the state’s responsibility.

“Your honour let it be known that bail was not denied it was granted. Failure for one to raise the bail can not be pinned against the prosecution,” the prosecution stated.

The state further pointed to inconsistencies in the defense’s position, citing an affidavit that indicated the real problem was the inability to locate Mumia’s ID and passport, not lack of funds.

“Your honour have been served with affidavit where indicate that sole issue that is hindering them is that they could not find the accused persons ID and passports. Your honour the said affidavit informs states that the visited the accused person in preparation to raise bail. They didn’t state they are unable to raise the amount but they say they couldn’t get his ID and passport,” the prosecution argued.

Magistrate Ndombi ordered that a pre-bail report be filed before making any orders on the reduction of bail. The court has detained Mumia until Thursday, when it will deliver its ruling on whether to reduce the Sh1 million bail terms.

In the case, Mumia faces four counts under Section 22(1) of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act No. 5 of 2018, all related to posts allegedly made on December 30, 2025.

According to the charge sheet, Mumia is alleged to have used a pseudo Facebook account under the name Robinson Kipruto Ngetich to publish images of President Ruto lying on a bed and falsely portraying him as deceased.

Another image allegedly depicted the President on a hospital bed in critical medical condition.

“On December 30, 2025 at an unknown place within the Republic of Kenya knowingly published false information… by posting an image of President William Ruto lying on a bed and falsely portraying him as deceased, information you knew to be false,” the charge sheet reads in part.

He is also accused of publishing similar false images on his Instagram account, @harrisonmumia, showing the President lying on a bed in critical medical condition, falsely suggesting severe illness or death.

Making his case for bail reduction, Mango argued that Mumia poses no flight risk, pointing out that police knew exactly where to find him when they conducted a raid at his Kangundo Road residence.

The post Fresh Twist as Atheist President Mumia Demands President Ruto Testify in Fake Posts Case appeared first on Insider Bits News.