Former Nairobi governor Mike Sonko has reacted with relief and gratitude after the Court of Appeal on this week blocked a bid by the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) to maintain freezing orders on hundreds of millions of shillings in accounts linked to him.
Sonko described the ruling as justice restored after a protracted legal fight that has stretched nearly six years.
In a statement posted on X, the former governor said the judgment was a vindication of his long‑standing claim that the state’s case against his wealth was unfounded.
“Six years of waiting. Six years of fighting. Six years of suffering. Today, I thank God justice has prevailed. God is great, and His timing is perfect,” Sonko wrote.
The Court of Appeal ruling follows a decision by the High Court last year to dismiss ARA’s attempt to forfeit about Sh537 million–Sh574 million in accounts the agency alleged were proceeds of crime.
The appellate bench refused the state’s request to stay that judgment, effectively allowing Sonko to regain access to the frozen funds.
Sonko thanked the judiciary for what he described as an impartial application of the law.
“I’m also grateful to the courts for judging based on facts and evidence, not personal hate,” he said in his X post.
The statement framed the court’s decision as a triumph of evidence over bias in a legal and political context that has often been intensely polarized.
The former governor reserved special praise for his lead counsel, Harrison Kinyanjui, acknowledging his role in steering the defence through years of litigation.
“Special thanks to my lawyer, Harrison Kinyanjui, for never giving up on me, unlike those who abandoned me when I was ‘illegally’ impeached. God is watching, and justice will always prevail,” Sonko’s statement read.
His reference to impeachment alludes to his 2020 removal from office by the Nairobi County Assembly and subsequent Senate decision — a process fraught with controversy and claims of political persecution from Sonko’s allies.
The former governor has consistently maintained that his removal was procedurally flawed and politically motivated.
Legal experts say the latest ruling, while significant, relates specifically to the procedural question of freezing orders rather than the substantive asset recovery claims.
The ARA had argued the funds represented unexplained wealth linked to corrupt practices during Sonko’s tenure, a contention the former governor has repeatedly denied.
ARA’s effort to freeze assets under the Proceeds of Crime and Anti‑Money Laundering Act has faced setbacks in both High Court and appellate rulings, which found the agency had not met the threshold to justify preservation orders.
The refusal to stay the High Court judgment by the Court of Appeal means Sonko can now access his accounts pending further litigation.