Kenyan Court Rejects Bid to Freeze Ex-Governor Mike Sonko’s Millions in Legal Setback for Anti-Graft Agency
Nairobi, Kenya — Kenya’s Court of Appeal has dealt a blow to the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) by dismissing its attempt to freeze millions of shillings tied to former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko. The ruling, delivered this week, found there was “nothing to stay” after a High Court decision last year threw out the agency’s case against the controversial politician.
In a unanimous decision, appellate judges rejected ARA’s request for a stay of execution, emphasizing that the October 1, 2025, High Court ruling had simply dismissed the case without issuing any binding orders. The court stressed that under Kenyan law, a stay cannot be applied to a “negative order”—a decision that does not compel any action from either party.
“A dismissal of a suit does not amount to a decree capable of execution, except as to costs,” the judges stated, effectively shutting down ARA’s argument.
Legal Misstep by Anti-Graft Agency
The ruling highlights a critical misstep by the ARA, which had sought to preserve funds allegedly tied to Sonko while preparing an appeal. The appellate court questioned why the agency filed for a stay if, as it claimed, Section 97 of the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act (POCAMLA) already protected the assets in question.
“The very filing of this application suggests doubt over whether the assets were ever automatically preserved,” the judges noted.
With costs awarded against the ARA, the decision marks another legal victory for Sonko, who has faced multiple corruption allegations since his removal as Nairobi governor in 2020. The flamboyant politician, known for his populist rhetoric and flashy lifestyle, has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, framing the cases against him as politically motivated.
Broader Implications for Asset Recovery Efforts
Legal experts say the ruling reinforces a long-standing principle in Kenyan appellate law: courts cannot issue stay orders where no enforceable directive exists. The decision also raises questions about the ARA’s strategy in high-profile asset recovery cases, particularly when targeting politically connected individuals.
“This ruling clarifies that agencies must have a solid legal basis before seeking to freeze assets,” said Nairobi-based lawyer Grace Mwangi. “Without an existing court order, such applications are unlikely to succeed.”
For now, Sonko retains access to the contested funds, though the ARA could still proceed with its appeal. Observers say the case underscores the challenges Kenya faces in prosecuting corruption cases, where legal technicalities often delay or derail proceedings.
Sonko’s Legal Battles Far From Over
Despite this win, Sonko remains entangled in multiple court cases, including charges of money laundering and unlawful acquisition of property. The former governor, who has attempted political comebacks despite his legal troubles, has framed the latest ruling as vindication.
“The courts have once again shown that truth prevails,” Sonko said in a statement. “This was a baseless attempt to tarnish my name.”
Critics, however, argue that Kenya’s anti-corruption efforts remain hampered by procedural delays and legal loopholes. The ARA has yet to comment on whether it will pursue further action.
As the legal drama continues, the case serves as a reminder of the complexities in holding powerful figures accountable—a recurring theme in Kenya’s fight against graft.
— Reported by Nexio News
