Court orders forfeiture of car in assets recovery dispute

The High Court in Nairobi has ordered the forfeiture of a Mercedes Benz used in the smuggling of elephant tusks, in a decision that delivered a mixed outcome for the Assets Recovery Agency.

In a judgment delivered on April 17, 2026, Justice Benjamin Musyoki allowed the state’s application in respect of the vehicle but declined to grant forfeiture of two commercial plots in Mathare North, Nairobi.

The court found that while the Mercedes Benz was used as an “instrumentality of crime” after it was intercepted transporting ivory, the land parcels could not be linked to illegal activity at the time of purchase.

The Assets Recovery Agency had sought to seize both the vehicle and the properties, arguing that Jackson Mbugua Burugu was a career poacher who laundered proceeds from the illegal wildlife trade into real estate investments.

The agency told the court that Burugu was arrested in October 2021 at Enasoit Conservancy in Laikipia County with four elephant tusks weighing 69.2 kilogrammes concealed in the Mercedes Benz.

He had previously been charged in Nyahururu in 2017 for illegal sandalwood transportation and later in Nanyuki in 2021 for dealing in endangered species trophies.

In his defence, Burugu insisted he ran a legitimate hardware business that funded his lifestyle, dismissing the charges as malicious and untrue.

Court records showed he did not expressly deny the arrests but argued there was no link between the properties and the alleged criminal activity, noting that the land was acquired in 2014, years before the charges cited by the state.

A third party, John Wambugu Maina, told the court he had purchased the Mathare plots from Burugu in September 2023 for Sh21 million, insisting he was an innocent purchaser.

The Assets Recovery Agency, however, had argued that the sale was a hurried attempt to dispose of suspected proceeds of crime.

Justice Musyoki ruled that the agency failed to demonstrate that the properties were proceeds of crime at the time of acquisition, adding that there was no evidence the buyer was aware of any illegality.

“There is exhibited clear sale agreements which bear stamp duty impressions and are shown to have been duly registered,” the judge said.

“There is no evidence that the interested party was aware of any encumbrances or the dealings or character of the respondent. I decline to declare the landed properties as proceeds of crime.”

However, the court reached a different conclusion on the Mercedes Benz, finding that it was directly used in the commission of an offence.

The judge noted there was reasonable suspicion that the vehicle was used in illegal activities, describing it as a conveyor or enabler of crime.

He ordered that the vehicle be transferred to the Assets Recovery Agency through the Director General of the National Transport and Safety Authority.

The ruling leaves the state with control of the vehicle but denies it recovery of the contested land.