Another Huge Blow to Tuju in Battle to Evade Auction

The Supreme Court delivered a decisive blow to former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju’s ongoing battle to halt the seizure of his property in Karen due to unpaid debts.

The Court’s ruling, led by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu and including justices Njoki Ndungu, Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala, and William Ouko, upheld the East African Development Bank’s authority to enforce its claims against Tuju.

Tuju had approached the Supreme Court with an application for interim orders to prevent the enforcement of a judgment handed down on April 20 until his appeal received a final verdict.

His central argument revolved around the looming threat of eviction from his cherished Dari properties, which had been held as collateral by the EADB for his outstanding debt, estimated at approximately 2.2 billion Kenyan Shillings.

Expressing concerns that the bank’s actions could render his appeal moot and hinder any chances of financial recovery, Tuju sought the Court’s intervention.

However, his plea was met with the Supreme Court’s rejection, which affirmed the EADB’s ability to exercise its rights as a creditor.

Unperturbed by the initial ruling, Tuju, represented by his legal counsel Paul Muite, made another move in his legal chess game. This time, he aimed to bolster his case by introducing additional evidence that he argued would strengthen his position.

Tuju claimed that some crucial pieces of evidence were unjustly struck down by the Court in its earlier October ruling.

Nonetheless, the Supreme Court once again ruled against Tuju’s request, solidifying its stance on the matter and reinforcing the bank’s position. This development leaves Tuju facing an uphill battle as he attempts to navigate the legal complexities surrounding the seizure of his assets and the significant debt owed to the East African Development Bank.

As the legal saga continues, observers and legal experts are closely watching how this case will unfold, as it has far-reaching implications not only for Tuju but also for the broader legal landscape related to debt enforcement and property rights in Kenya.

The court ruled that Tuju’s bid to add additional evidences is an afterthought that can not be allowed.