Chief Registrar of the Judiciary, Anne Atieno Amadi

The personal bank accounts that are registered in the names of the Chief Registrar of the Judiciary, Anne Atieno Amadi, alongside those of her son Brian Ochieng Amadi and two other individuals, have been directed to be frozen by the High Court in Nairobi, and no withdrawals are to be allowed without prior consent.

This came about as a result of a lawsuit that was filed against Ms Amadi, her son Brian, and other individuals by a gold-related business situated in Dubai.

In the petition, Bruton Gold Trading LLC asserts that the individuals suspected, while working on behalf of the law firm Amadi and Associates Advocates, fraudulently acquired over Ksh. 89 million for gold that they never gave.

Bruton Gold Trading LLC says that the suspects got the money by selling gold that they did not supply.

The Dubai business asserts that it was passionate about purchasing gold from Kenya and that one of the individuals suspected, Daniel Ndegwa Kangara, was the one who connected them to each other.

They said that once the parties reached a deal, Kangara was obligated to provide gold, which was then going to be sent to Dubai to be sold there.

They contend that 71 million Kenyan shillings were sent to Ms Amadi's legal company but that no gold was ever shipped from Kenya to Dubai. However, they admit that gold was traded between the two countries.

They say in their lawsuit against the Judiciary Registrar that investigations carried out by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) uncovered the fact that she is the registered owner of Amadi and Associates Advocates.

They further claim that the investigation revealed that the account where the money was put was created by Ms Amadi after she joined the judiciary. This allegation is based on the fact that the money was deposited.

In addition, they contend that the money that was given to the company under the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act was illegally taken out of the country in cash by Ms Amadi's son and two other individuals who did not provide the necessary papers.

According to the documents filed with the court, the Dubai company claimed that Ms Amadi afterwards phoned them and asked to clear the money within six months.

However, they denied her request since there was no assurance of guarantee on the part of the defendants.


Post a Comment

What is your say on this

Previous Post Next Post