Advertisement

Court declines to lift warrants against Safaricom honchos

Court declines to lift warrants against Safaricom honchos
Safaricom chief executive Peter Ndegwa
Listen to This Article Enhance your reading experience by listening to this article.

Senior directors of Safaricom, including chief executive Peter Ndegwa have suffered a blow after the High Court declined to lift warrants of arrest issued against them last year.

Justice Lucy Njuguna of Embu High Court dismissed with costs the two applications filed by Safaricom, saying the directors did not challenge the ruling which found them in contempt of court.

Judge also noted that it was presumptuous to grant the orders sought as the trial court was yet to grant them leave to file an Appeal at the High Court. “It is trite that under Section 75 of the Civil Procedure Act, leave to appeal is not automatic and the applicant is yet to convince the court that it deserves the order. As it stands now, the fate of that application is yet to be determined and this court cannot assume that the applicant will automatically be granted the leave sought,” judge ruled.

Directors facing arrest are Ndegwa, Dilip Pal, Christopher Kirugia, Winfred Ouko, Raisibe Morathi, Sitholizwe Mdalalose, Rose Ogega, Francesco Bianco, former CEO Michael Joseph, Bitange Ndemo, Mohamed Shameel Aziz Joosub and Linda Muriuki.

Senior Principal Magistrate Henry Nyakweba of Embu Magistrate Court had issued the warrant after the telco company refused to obey a court order directing it to release Sh7.7 million, being claimed by one Ephantus Njuki.

The money was from insurance firm Invesco Assurance. Safaricom operated an Invesco account through a Paybill number and Njuki attached the account to recover a compensation claim of Sh7.7 million.

In his suit papers, Njuki claimed Safaricom PLC was duly served with a Garnishee order absolute on October 4, 2022 for the release of Sh7,778,887.24 by way of email but failed and ignored to adhere with the same.

While seeking to overturn the lower court decision, Safaricom argued that none of its directors were served personally with the proceedings that led to them being found in contempt of court.

 Telco company argued that the email address that Njuki used to serve them had been provided during the Covid-19 pandemic and the email was later temporarily suspended following a slump in Covid cases.

Author Profile

For these and more credible stories, join our revamped Telegram and WhatsApp channels.
Advertisement