DNK International By Our Reporter,Nairobi.
A Nairobi Constitutional court has received detailed information on what trespassed prior to arrest of lawyer Kimani.
In court documents,it has come out that it is Raphael Tuju who needed legal services from former Judge and Lawyer Kimani.
Lawyer Kimani has stated clearly in his petition to stop prosecution and harassment that his arrest over alleged bribery was not only unlawful, but the result of a calculated and premeditated entrapment scheme, as detailed in his supporting affidavit and court filings.
In his affidavit,he maintains that his involvement with the 1st Respondent, Raphael Tuju, was strictly professional from the outset. He states that in February 2026, he was approached by Okiri Thomas Awili, known to him from previous legal engagements, with a request to meet Tuju for purposes of a possible legal brief relating to matters before the High Court’s Commercial and Tax Division.
He avers that the initial meeting was purely introductory and did not result in any formal instructions or engagement. According to the affidavit, he was only requested to familiarise himself with ongoing commercial disputes touching on Tuju’s properties, after which he reviewed relevant rulings and prepared for a possible formal brief.
Wachira further states that during a subsequent meeting on February 22, 2026, Tuju declined to formally instruct him, citing a favourable High Court ruling already delivered in MILIMANI HCCOMM/E636/2024 and indicating that no further legal representation was necessary at the time. He emphasizes that at no point was he retained, instructed or placed on record as counsel for the 1st Respondent.
The advocate maintains that there was no further engagement between the two until March 9, 2026, when, following delivery of a ruling adverse to Tuju’s interests, he was urgently requested to attend a meeting to discuss possible appellate action, including filing an appeal and seeking a stay of execution.
It is during this meeting at Entim Sidai Wellness Sanctuary in Karen that the events leading to his arrest unfolded.
In his affidavit, Wachira states that shortly after the meeting began, Tuju produced Ksh 1,000,000 in cash and placed it on a table without any prior request, discussion or solicitation on his part. He insists the money was “unilateral, unsolicited and unexpected,” and did not arise from any conduct attributable to him.
He further states that he did not take possession of the money and instead briefly excused himself from the meeting. It was at this point, he states, that officers from the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission approached and arrested him for allegedly soliciting a bribe.
Wachira contends that the manner of arrest points to a “well organised entrapment operation” orchestrated in advance, asserting that the events were staged with the sole purpose of fabricating a criminal offence against him.
He relies heavily on a statutory declaration sworn by Okiri Thomas Awili on March 23, 2026, which he says corroborates his account and confirms that the alleged bribery incident was engineered. According to the affidavit, the declaration indicates that the meeting was initiated by the 1st Respondent following an adverse court ruling and that the money was introduced without any solicitation by the advocate.
Wachira further claims that there were attempts after the arrest to influence the narrative, including efforts to induce the deponent to alter his statement to implicate him, which he says were declined.
He also raises concerns over the recording and circulation of videos of his arrest, which he says have been published across media platforms and distorted to portray him as a “bribe broker,” thereby damaging his reputation before the conclusion of investigations.
The advocate asserts that the arrest and subsequent investigations are not based on any reasonable suspicion grounded in fact or law, but rather on a staged scenario designed to create a false narrative against the Judiciary, particularly in light of the outcome of the commercial dispute involving the 1st Respondent.
He maintains that no demand, solicitation or agreement to receive any benefit was ever made by him and that there was no connection between him and any judicial officer that would facilitate such an alleged scheme.
Further, Wachira argues that the continued investigations by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission are being conducted in bad faith, despite what he terms as clear exculpatory evidence and amount to an abuse of investigative and prosecutorial powers.
He also cites violations of multiple constitutional rights, including the right to liberty, dignity, fair administrative action and fair hearing, stating that he was detained overnight without bail and subjected to reputational harm and professional prejudice.
In his pleadings, Wachira is represented by his law firm, WACHIRA & MUMBI ADVOCATES, while advocate Cecil Miller is associated with legal representation on the side of the respondents in related proceedings.
In the petition and accompanying applications, Wachira is seeking several orders from the High Court. These include declarations that his arrest, detention and ongoing investigations are unconstitutional, unlawful and null and void; orders prohibiting the respondents from further arresting, investigating or prosecuting him in relation to the events of March 9, 2026 and judicial review orders to quash any decisions or proceedings arising from the impugned incident.
He is also seeking conservatory orders restraining further publication or dissemination of his name and image in connection with the allegations, as well as compensation for damages including reputational harm, loss of professional standing, emotional distress and disruption to his legal practice.
The matter is now before the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court, where the court is expected to issue directions on the hearing of the applications and the petition.
[DNK-International@April 2,2026]
