Court of Appeal rejects ARA bid to freeze Sonko funds

ARA's bid to keep Mike Sonko's bank accounts frozen just got swatted down by the Court of Appeal on a basic legal technicality.

High Court backstory

• Justice Nixon Sifuna dismissed ARA's forfeiture suit on October 1, 2025.
• Sifuna found zero proof that the funds came from criminal activity.
• Freeze orders on Sonko's accounts were lifted entirely.
• ARA got hit with legal costs from that ruling.

Why the appeal court said no

• A three-judge bench ruled that you cannot pause a dismissal order.
• Justices M'inoti, Mwita, and Ongaya sat on the panel.
• At least ten prior rulings back up that exact legal position.
• M'inoti bluntly asked ARA what exactly they wanted stayed.

ARA's Section 97 argument backfires

• Lawyer Esther Muchiri cited POCAMLA's Section 97 provision.
• She argued that filing an appeal automatically preserves freeze orders.
• M'inoti pointed out that logic makes the whole application unnecessary.
• The bench refused to interpret Section 97 in this context.

How it wrapped up

• ARA withdrew the application rather than face formal dismissal.
• Senior Counsel Harrison Kinyanjui represented Sonko throughout.
• Kinyanjui asked the court to exclude Section 97 from the record.
• A costs ruling drops on March 13, 2026.