Judiciary rejects claims of bribery in decades-old KCB-Muiri case
The case traces back to 1988 when KCB advanced a loan to Benjoh Amalgamated Ltd, secured by properties owned by the company and a 443-acre coffee estate belonging to Muiri Coffee Estate Ltd.
The Judiciary has strongly rejected claims made by Captain (Rtd) Kung'u Muigai alleging widespread judicial corruption in the decades-old commercial dispute pitting Benjoh Amalgamated Ltd and Muiri Coffee Estate Ltd against Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB).
In a statement on Wednesday, Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo termed the allegations "malicious, unfounded, and a deliberate attempt to discredit judicial officers," stressing that no credible evidence of misconduct had ever been presented.
More To Read
- Supreme Court warns political leaders that undermining IEBC threatens 2027 polls integrity
- Legal experts weigh in on Supreme Court ruling declining to extend lapsed boundaries review timelines
- African Bar Association honours Supreme Court for 2022 election rulings
- Supreme Court rules IEBC secretariat cannot undertake core electoral duties
- Kenya School of Law sets October 31 deadline for training applications
- Businessman seeks court to block sale of city apartments over alleged contempt by KCB
The case traces back to 1988 when KCB advanced a loan to Benjoh Amalgamated Ltd, secured by properties owned by the company and a 443-acre coffee estate belonging to Muiri Coffee Estate Ltd.
Following the default, the parties entered into a consent order in 1992 before Justice Erastus Githinji, in which Benjoh admitted indebtedness and undertook to repay the outstanding sums. When repayment failed, KCB moved to realise its securities.
Repeated attempts by the borrowers to stop the auction of the properties were dismissed by both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. In 1998, the Court of Appeal upheld the consent order as valid and binding, ruling that the matter was conclusively settled.
Despite this, the borrowers filed more than 14 suits across various courts over two decades, all dismissed as res judicata - the legal principle that bars re-litigation of a matter already conclusively decided.
The Court of Appeal in 2018 went further, terming the serial applications "vexatious and an abuse of court process".
Captain Muigai has since accused a total of 17 appellate judges and one High Court judge of corruption, alleging that those who ruled against him were bribed.
The Judiciary dismissed these claims as "ridiculous", noting that the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) had independently reviewed related petitions and found no evidence of impropriety.
"The Judiciary treats all allegations of corruption with utmost seriousness, but dissatisfaction with judicial outcomes is not proof of misconduct," Ndemo said. "Respect for final court judgments is essential to the administration of justice."
He urged aggrieved parties to pursue lawful avenues of appeal or complaint instead of "misinformation and smear campaigns" that undermine public trust in the courts.
Top Stories Today
