The High Court in Nairobi has declined to extend interim orders that had frozen assets worth Sh229 million related to the suspended Kenyatta National Hospital Chief Executive Officer (CEO), ruling that the injunction had already lapsed earlier in October.
The matter was heard before the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes on Wednesday, where Justice Lucy Njuguna said the law does not permit revival of lapsed injunctions, even where parties claim they were mentioned informally.
The orders, which had been issued on September 29, 2025, were temporary preservation measures obtained by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act to block the ex-CEO from dealing with properties, bank accounts, and treasury bonds estimated at Sh229 million.
The assets are suspected to be proceeds of corruption, with the EACC arguing that they were acquired through unexplained wealth.
During the session, EACC counsel Olga Ochola asked the court to extend the interim orders, arguing that the Commission still required time to verify documents filed by the respondent (suspended CEO).
She said the Commission was preparing a further affidavit and sought an additional 30 days to conduct on-the-ground verification of annexures attached in his response.
His lawyer, Kado, opposed the request, insisting that the interim orders had lapsed earlier on October 9 and that mentioning them weeks later would amount to “reviving lapsed orders.”
“I have an issue with interim orders. The last time we were in court, there was no mention of such orders to be extended, and records can bear me witness, they were not extended in any way. Mentioning them today would be like reviving lapsed orders,” she said.
The lawyer argued that EACC had been given sufficient time to act within the timelines set by the court and urged that the application be concluded quickly to allow progress in the main case.
In her ruling, Justice Njuguna granted EACC 30 more days to file its further affidavit on the main injunction but declined the plea to revive the freezing orders following an earlier application where the orders were granted.
“How can I extend orders that lapsed? The law does not allow me to extend lapsed orders,” she said.
However, the judge directed that the status quo be maintained, meaning neither party should interfere with the contested assets until the next mention date, set for December 4, 2025.
The EACC moved to court in an application under a certificate of urgency, seeking preservation of the assets as investigations into allegations of graft and financial impropriety at the national referral hospital continue.
"That pending the hearing of this application inter partes, this Honourable court be pleased to issue an order of injunction restraining the respondent, his agents, servants and/or any other persons from selling, transferring, charging or further charging, leasing, developing, subdividing, disposing, wasting or in any other way (however described) alienating the properties," court documents state.
