The High Court has ordered former Kiambu Governor Ferdinand Waititu to forfeit assets valued at Ksh131 million to the State after finding that the properties were acquired through unexplained and unlawful means.
In a judgment delivered in Nairobi, the court ruled that Waititu and his wife failed to provide a credible explanation on how they acquired the assets, despite their known sources of income at the time. The case was filed by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) under Kenya’s civil asset recovery laws, which allow the State to reclaim property suspected to be proceeds of corruption.
The ruling forms part of a broader Ksh1.9 billion asset recovery case, in which the EACC sought the forfeiture of several properties, vehicles, machinery and cash linked to the former governor. While the court did not allow recovery of the entire amount claimed, it held that specific assets had clearly been acquired unlawfully and must therefore be surrendered.
Among the assets ordered forfeited are parcels of land, motor vehicles and heavy machinery whose combined value stands at approximately Ksh131 million. The court found that the explanations given — including claims of loans, business earnings and savings — were inconsistent and unsupported by sufficient documentation.
In its decision, the court emphasised that public officials bear a higher duty to account for their wealth, especially when it appears disproportionate to their legitimate earnings. Under the law, assets that cannot be reasonably explained are deemed to be proceeds of corruption and are subject to forfeiture to the State.
The judgment is a major milestone in the ongoing efforts by anti-corruption agencies to recover public resources lost through graft. It also reinforces the use of civil proceedings as an effective tool in combating corruption, even where criminal cases may take longer to conclude.
Waititu’s legal troubles have continued to mount in recent years, with multiple corruption cases linked to his tenure as Kiambu governor. The latest ruling further tightens scrutiny on former and current public officials accused of amassing unexplained wealth.
As the forfeited assets are transferred to the State, the case sends a strong message on accountability, transparency and the consequences of corruption in public office.
