Kiambu Governor Kimani Wamatangi/FILEKiambu Governor Kimani Wamatangi has sought to halt further proceedings in a Sh813.1 million civil recovery case filed by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC), pending the determination of an application seeking the recusal of the judge handling the matter.
The recusal application, filed towards the end of 2025, has since become the central procedural issue before the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Division of the High Court in Nairobi, with the defence maintaining that no substantive orders can be issued until the question is resolved.
The application sought the recusal of Justice Lucy Njuguna and came up before Justice Benjamin Mwikya, a development that the defence challenged.
The EACC suit, filed on October 31, 2025, seeks the recovery of Sh813.1 million, which the commission claims represents funds allegedly arising from corruption and unjust enrichment in connection with the award of road construction tenders in Kiambu County.
In addition to restitution, the commission is seeking preservation orders to freeze several bank accounts associated with companies named in the suit, pending the conclusion of the proceedings.
Governor Wamatangi has previously maintained that he is being unfairly targeted and has described the intended charges as politically motivated. He has also denied having any shareholding interests in several of the companies under investigation.
During a court session on Thursday, EACC counsel Ben Murie urged the court to issue interim preservation orders, submitting that existing timelines had lapsed and that the commission faced the risk of dissipation of funds that it alleges are the subject of the recovery proceedings.
Murie told the court that following the filing of the recusal application, the matter was placed before Duty Judge Alexander Muteti for directions, but no extension of existing orders or interim preservation orders was granted.
He added that the commission subsequently filed an application dated January 5, 2026, seeking urgent intervention, but remained without any preservation orders.
“We come before this court seeking interim orders in terms of prayer two of our application dated November 4, 2025. The duty of this court is to preserve the subject matter of litigation,” Murie told the court.
He argued that the court could proceed to hear the application for injunctive relief at this stage, notwithstanding the pending recusal application, in order to safeguard public funds.
However, Wamatangi’s lawyer, Stephen Ligunya, opposed the request, arguing that the commission’s application was an attempt to sidestep earlier directions issued by the trial judge.
Ligunya told the court that the judge handling the matter had directed that the recusal application would take precedence over all other applications, with directions scheduled for February 4, 2026.
He argued that since the judge had neither recused herself nor reviewed those directions, no other court could properly issue interim orders in the matter.
“It is curious how this file is before you when the issue of recusal has not been dispensed with. There is no application for review and no basis to overturn the directions of the substantive judge,” Ligunya said.
An application has also been filed seeking to strike out the Kiambu Governor from the proceedings.
Counsel Muchiri, appearing for other defendants, supported the objection, submitting that all parties were entitled to be heard on the recusal application before any substantive orders were considered.
In a brief rejoinder, Murie maintained that the defence had not addressed the commission’s position that the court had a duty to preserve the subject matter of the suit.
The court is expected to issue further directions on the matter.
Comments 0
Sign in to join the conversation
Sign In Create AccountNo comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!