By Anderson Ojwang
Former Foreign Affairs Minister Raphael Tuju has explained that his 24 hectares of land in Nairobi’s leafy Karen Estate is not grabbed public land or proceeds of crime money stolen from government coffers.
In a third open letter to Chief Justice Martha Koome, Tuju went on to explain to the Gen Zs how he acquired his prime property, valued at billions of shillings.
“For the benefit of the Gen Zs who may read this open letter and who may be wondering how I acquired that relatively large piece of land, it is important that I give one or two sentences to explain myself.
None of my Karen land is grabbed public land. Neither is any of it bought from proceeds of crime or money stolen from public coffers, despite having been a senior public servant at some stages of my life.
Being politically exposed, I am aware of the fact that I can easily become a victim of mass media and public lynching when people are unable to understand the sources of my properties.
I can confirm to all that I first acquired my piece of land in Karen some 39 years ago when I was a young journalist in my 20s, working as a producer of documentaries and a TV news anchor.
The public and the media, on several occasions in the recent past, have been the victims of facile manipulation by a PR firm hired by the EADB to push a negative narrative against me, ignoring these historical facts of my life and career.
I was young, but I borrowed money to buy 2.5 acres when an acre used to be bought for one hundred thousand shillings. I borrowed money progressively from National Bank of Kenya and Kenya Commercial Bank over the years and bought more.
It is these lands that various vultures are now circling over, trying to grab them at any cost,” he wrote.
In his letter, Tuju took issue with some Supreme Court (SCoK) judges over allegedly making statements and discussing matters before the court.
“In this open letter, I refer to this case at this time when some SCoK judges are very vocal in the public domain, making statements and moves in the Judiciary as if they are infallible.
They are discussing, in the public domain, matters before the High Court and the JSC. What should mere mortals like me do when they do this on cases that affect us?
True, we must respect the Judiciary. We must uphold the rule of law, such as obeying court orders.
In the modern model of the state, the Judiciary is as indispensable as the Legislature and the Executive. Nobody in their right mind can argue with the fact that the Judiciary is an important pillar of the state and the last bastion for the protection of the constitutional rights of all citizens.
The Apex court, the SCoK judges, therefore, must bear the solemn responsibility of carrying out their duties with wisdom and sensitivity, upholding the rule of law, ensuring a fair trial, and protecting the Constitution.
An irresponsible SCoK can easily make our country burn, just as happened in the USA. It was only after the civil war that the US Congress, another arm of government, enacted legislation to ensure that the abhorrent and immoral ruling of the Supreme Court that supported slavery was vacated,” he wrote.
Tuju said the Judiciary must rise above and ensure the upholding of justice in the country, even if the Executive becomes dysfunctional.
“The country can survive a defective, dysfunctional, and corrupt Executive or Legislature. Kenyans can significantly change these two branches of government through elections every five years.
But our Lords, the Justices of the SCoK, have security of tenure. The checks and balances to ensure that impunity does not feature in their actions are vested in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
When SCoK judges attempt to stop proceedings at the JSC, then it can only mean that they want a licence for impunity.
In their recent public statements, the SCoK judges rightly insist that they must be respected by Kenyans.
But I believe that they too should respect the law of the land and constitutional bodies like the JSC. And by the way, I repeat, they should stop making public comments on matters at the JSC and in court. They should start by respecting their own institutions.
The SCoK judges want immunity from the JSC, yet other judges of the High Court have been subjected to the JSC process. Undermining the JSC is undermining the Constitution,” he wrote.
Tuju also wants the Chief Justice to set up a tribunal to interrogate the conduct of Senior Counsel (SC) Fred Ojiambo and SC Githu Muigai for gross professional misconduct so that they may be stripped of the title of SC.
Tuju wrote that at the centre of his conflict with EADB and now also against five Supreme Court judges is a 27-acre piece of land in the Karen area of Nairobi.
“The foregoing being only background, this is the third letter I have written to you, Madam Chief Justice, with regard to my case. I enclose all together with your replies for ease of reference.
My first letter received your response when you stopped the panel of five judges from engaging in an obvious and shameful infraction of court procedures.
My second letter listed a further seven violations of the law and court processes by the panel of five SCoK judges, despite your earlier intervention.
In this second instance, I received a letter from all seven judges, including yourself.
You never denied the seven grounds of misconduct that included refusal to allow my constitutional right to a rejoinder.
The judges had also dismissed my evidence on the grounds that I had stolen the documents from the EADB offices in Kampala. The response of the seven judges bordered on the ridiculous. I quote: “The issues raised in your letter are very disturbing.” (Here enclosed for your reference).
It later emerged that these were lies by bank lawyers after investigations by the DCI.
When the five judges continued with their violations and open biases, I got their drift loud and clear. I reported some of the most immoral rulings and abuses of process to the JSC,” he wrote.
“Also, before the Senior Counsel Committee that you chair, there are two cases against SC Fred Ojiambo and SC Githu Muigai with respect to the manufacture of false affidavits that have now been recanted at the High Court and are at the centre of criminal proceedings against the EADB officials at the Nairobi Magistrates’ Court.
With respect to SC Githu Muigai, with the declaration of the EADB Act as unconstitutional by the High Court in Machakos on 20th March 2025, we are looking at a serious criminal conflict of interest, as he chaperoned this legislation in Parliament when he was the AG while his firm was, at the same time, doing roaring business with EADB, who remain his clients to this day,” he wrote.
