Businessman John Ngumi’s fight against the anti-graft agency’s continued investigation of the Sh6 billion Telkom Kenya sale deal has shifted to the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes court.
The Constitutional & Human Rights Court ruled that the case belongs in the specialised division because it directly challenges a corruption investigation by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC).
The EACC was investigating whether the government irregularly acquired a 60 percent stake in Telkom Kenya from Jamhuri Holdings for Sh6 billion in 2022.
The commission said the acquisition proceeded without approval from the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA), a legal opinion from the Attorney-General and the transaction not meeting the threshold for unforeseen and unavoidable expenditure under public finance rules.
Mr Ngumi was an adviser to Jamhuri Holdings, the vehicle through which private equity firm Helios Investment Partners held its Telkom stake, earning a pay cheque of $3.07 million (Sh397 million) for the job.
The EACC completed its inquiry in August 2023 and forwarded recommendations to the Director of Public Prosecutions for charges against Mr Ngumi and other officials and executives linked to the transaction.
The recommended charges included conspiracy to commit an economic crime, 15 counts of abuse of office, conflict of interest, two counts of willful failure to comply with procurement laws, fraudulent acquisition of property, money laundering, acquisition of proceeds of crime and neglect of official duty.
Mr Ngumi moved to court in June 2026, challenging EACC’s continued investigation after the DPP failed to prosecute him.
He argues that the continued probe is unconstitutional, unlawful, unreasonable, oppressive and procedurally unfair, contrary to Articles 47 and 50 of the Constitution.
He wants the court to terminate the investigation and related enforcement actions.
He applied for a declaration that the investigations relating to him in respect of the advisory role were conclusively closed upon the decision of the DPP declining prosecution, and that any continuation of the same is unlawful and unconstitutional.
The petitioner is also seeking a permanent injunction against further investigations, summonses or enforcement action, a closure notice, clearance certificate and damages for alleged violation of his constitutional rights.
EACC opposed the petition’s continued hearing in the Constitutional and Human Rights Division, saying it directly concerns the commission’s statutory investigation of corruption and economic crime.
The commission said the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Division was established to handle such disputes and relied on practice directions requiring cases within its mandate to be transferred where hearing has not begun.
Mr Ngumi opposed the transfer, arguing that his petition principally concerned constitutional rights and that moving it would delay a matter already admitted and given directions.
Justice David Mburu rejected the argument, finding that the petition arose directly from an EACC investigation into alleged corrupt dealings and misuse of public resources.
“The pleadings confirm that the dispute arises from the investigation into alleged corrupt deals by the Petitioner. The respondent (EACC) states that the investigation is under review by the ODPP to guide on whether to charge the Petitioner,” the court said in the July 31, 2026 ruling.
EACC told the court that the investigation concerns the alleged misuse of public resources, including a government vehicle, and falls within the commission’s legal mandate.
The judge said it would be inappropriate for the Constitutional and Human Rights Division to hear a dispute falling within the mandate of the specialized division.
The court found that the petition was fresh and “squarely falls under the AC & EC Division”.
The case will be mentioned before the anti-corruption division’s Presiding Judge on September 21 for directions.
