Former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju EGH has issued a forceful rebuttal to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) following its controversial progress report on his widely covered disappearance, dismissing the agency’s update as speculative and injudicious.
Tuju’s response, addressed to the Kenyan public, challenges the DCI’s narrative, questions its methods and integrity, and raises concerns about intimidation of journalists.
In the statement released on April 5, 2026, Tuju confirmed that the Toyota Probox vehicle with registration KDN 673L — cited by the DCI as part of its investigative timeline — belongs to his sister‑in‑law, Ms Chemeli.
He explained that the car is part of a pool of vehicles used for security support, particularly at night.
Tuju noted that even during his tenure as a Cabinet Secretary, his security was intelligence‑led and discreet, contrasting sharply with what he describes as the showy and unspecified approaches implied by the DCI.
“I cannot be so naive and stupid to reveal to the DCI whatever security protocol I maintain,” Tuju said, asserting that he would not divulge such information after a chaotic raid by over 20 officers at his home in Karen in the early hours of the morning.
Tuju’s narrative sharply counters the DCI’s claim that his disappearance was staged.
He recounted that police officers, some wearing balaclavas, raided his residence at around 2:40 am, an incident he describes as an “illegal siege.” Video footage shared by his team, he claims, shows officers and vehicles with obscured number plates, suggesting operational secrecy inconsistent with lawful conduct.
The former CS also challenged the DCI to verify his wife’s movements, underscoring an immigration point.
Tuju said his spouse, Luiza Chepkesio, was aboard a Kenya Airways flight from Cape Town, South Africa when the DCI speculated she played a role in the alleged plot in Kenya.
He urged the agency to confirm immigration records at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) to ascertain the facts rather than rely on conjecture.
In a biting critique, Tuju dubbed DCI Director Amin Mohammed the “Abductor in Chief,” dismissing the agency’s framing of his disappearance investigation as absurd:
“Unless those who were trailing me just wanted to buy me dinner and I got scared and ran away,” he wrote, lampooning the DCI’s portrayal of events.
Tuju also flagged additional vehicles, including two gray Subarus with plates KBZ 296X and KCA 509Y, which he claims were parked at the Kerarapon Shell Petrol Station — owned by Hon Moses Wetang’ula — on the day of his movements.
He insists these vehicles were part of the surveillance he experienced and criticizes the DCI for overlooking them in its report.
A central pillar of Tuju’s rebuttal is his assertion that Director Amin Mohammed has a conflict of interest with respect to him.
Tuju alleges that Mohammed has a relationship with Fred Ojiambo, who is implicated in criminal cases related to the Eastern Africa Development Bank (EADB) — cases Tuju claims the DCI has intentionally stalled.
He alleges three months of obstruction in bringing Ojiambo to account, undermining public confidence in the director’s ability to impartially investigate matters involving Tuju.
Tuju went further to highlight what he views as inconsistency in the DCI’s investigative priorities, urging Mohammed to apply equal diligence to unresolved cases such as the disappearance and death of Cyrus Jirongo.
He juxtaposed his own situation — where he “emerged from legitimate hiding” and lives to tell the story — with other victims reportedly associated with the gray Subarus who did not survive, implicitly questioning differential treatment by the agency.
Lastly, Tuju accused the DCI of attempting to intimidate journalists covering the case. He called on the agency to cease what he described as threats and bullying of journalists, affirming that the press is protected under Article 34 of the Constitution.
Tuju’s response deepens an already contentious dispute over his disappearance, pitting the former CS against one of Kenya’s premier investigative agencies.
The evolving exchange underscores broader concerns about due process, institutional integrity, and media freedom in high‑profile investigations.
The DCI had earlier released a progress report asserting that Tuju’s disappearance was staged rather than a genuine abduction, citing CCTV timelines and suspect movements.
Authorities also suggested that Tuju’s own actions contributed to confusion about his status, a position Tuju vehemently rejects in his public rebuttal.
The case has since attracted widespread public and media attention, with debates centering on transparency, rule of law, and the role of security institutions in politically sensitive matters.