- Judiciary cautions Raphael Tuju against discussing the ongoing case involving Dari Limited and EADB.
- A UK court ruled in favor of EADB in 2019, with enforcement approved by Kenyan courts.
- Attempts by Dari Limited to overturn the judgment were dismissed at various judicial levels.
- Supreme Court judges recused themselves following bias allegations.
- Judiciary urges Tuju to respect the legal process and avoid public commentary.
The Judiciary has issued a warning to former Jubilee Secretary General and Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju, urging him to refrain from publicly discussing the ongoing legal dispute between Dari Limited and the East African Development Bank (EADB).
In a statement on Thursday, March 27, Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo noted that Tuju’s recent media statements regarding the matter were inappropriate, as the case remains active in court.
Legal Background of the Case
Ndemo outlined the history of the dispute, explaining that the conflict has been subjected to legal scrutiny across multiple jurisdictions.
A UK court ruled in 2019 in favor of EADB, ordering Dari Limited and its guarantors to settle outstanding financial claims. EADB later sought recognition of the ruling in Kenya, and on January 7, 2020, the High Court granted the request, making the UK judgment enforceable within the country.
Dari Limited attempted to challenge this decision, but the High Court dismissed their application on February 13, 2020. The company escalated the matter to the Court of Appeal, which upheld the initial judgment, prompting Dari Limited to move to the Supreme Court to overturn previous rulings.
Bias Allegations and Supreme Court Recusal
As the case progressed, Dari Limited complained to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), alleging bias from the Supreme Court bench handling the matter. Due to the seriousness of these claims, the judges assigned to the case recused themselves, leaving the Court of Appeal’s decision standing.
“During the pendency of the appeal at the Supreme Court, Dari Limited complained to the JSC, alleging bias on the part of the bench hearing the matter. Given the gravity of the accusations, the Supreme Court bench recused itself, effectively upholding the decision of the Court of Appeal,” stated Ndemo.
Auction Controversy and the Judiciary’s Stand
In September 2024, Dari Limited filed an application seeking to halt the auction of its multi-million-dollar properties involved in the legal battle. However, the High Court dismissed the application, reinforcing EADB’s right to enforce the UK ruling.
Ndemo emphasized that since the matter remains sub judice (under judicial consideration), all parties must allow due process to take its course.
“The Judiciary upholds the rule of law and due administration of justice. These issues should be resolved within the judicial framework and by the JSC,” he stated.
He further urged Tuju to avoid discussing the case in the media or on social platforms, stressing the importance of respecting the legal system.
Tuju’s Recent Remarks on Judiciary
Tuju’s public remarks come after he wrote to Chief Justice Martha Koome, questioning the actions of certain judges handling cases involving him.
He accused the Supreme Court judges of making a strategic decision to recuse themselves when they realized the case was collapsing due to recanted affidavits.
“When the five Supreme Court judges saw things going south as affidavits before them were recanted, they took a rather ‘clever’ move to recuse themselves. This was unprecedented in Commonwealth jurisprudence,” Tuju stated.
As legal proceedings continue, the Judiciary has reaffirmed its commitment to fair and impartial adjudication, urging all parties to respect the process.
