https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8293

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8293

The court was satisfied that the applicant had shown a sufficient basis under section 56(1) of ACECA to preserve the identified funds, properties, and motor vehicles because there was a reasonable apprehension that the respondents could dissipate assets suspected to have been acquired through corruption, thereby...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 8293 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission; 1st Respondent: Patrick Analoh Akivaga; 2nd Respondent: Damaris Sindavi Kayugira
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Anti-corruption and Economic Crimes Miscellaneous E024 of 2026
Procedural Posture
Originating Motion Under ACECA for Preservation/freezing Orders / Ruling
Outcome
Application allowed; preservation/freezing orders granted.
Judges
["BM Musyoki"]
Legal Topics
Unexplained Assets, Conflict of Interest, Abuse of Office, Bribery, Preservation of Property Pending Investigation, Freezing Orders
Source Language
en
Anti Corruption Law Civil Procedure Asset Freezing and Preservation Unexplained Assets Conflict of Interest Abuse of Office Bribery Preservation of Property Pending Investigation +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission

Applicant

Patrick Analoh Akivaga

1st Respondent

Damaris Sindavi Kayugira

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Motion Under ACECA for Preservation/freezing Orders / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the applicant established a basis for preservation orders over the respondents' assets pending investigations.
  2. 2 Whether section 56(1) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act permits freezing of suspected corruptly acquired assets.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's assets should be restrained to prevent dissipation and protect public interest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied that the applicant had shown a sufficient basis under section 56(1) of ACECA to preserve the identified funds, properties, and motor vehicles because there was a reasonable apprehension that the respondents could dissipate assets suspected to have been acquired through corruption, thereby frustrating investigations and making recovery impossible.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; preservation/freezing orders granted.

Orders

  • The respondents are restrained from withdrawing, transferring, disposing of, or otherwise dealing with Ksh. 23,000 held in account number 154491-0004 at Equity Investment Bank in the name of Patrick Analoh Akivaga.
  • The respondents are prohibited, whether personally or through agents, servants, or any other person, from leasing, charging, alienating, wasting, transferring, disposing of, or otherwise dealing with all or any of the properties and motor vehicles listed in prayer 3 of the Originating Motion dated 12/6/2026.