A businessman at the centre of Ruraka land saga has suffered a setback after the High Court declined to temporarily block the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) from interrogating him.
Justice Chacha Mwita only directed that the matter be heard on October 30 and that he serves EACC with the case documents.
He had last week moved to court to seek protection over the ongoing probe on the disputed land.
The judge’s directive also affects Afrison Import Export Limited, a company alleged to have received compensation for the said land since it is listed as a second petitioner in the case. Mr Mburu is a director of the firm.
Through the firm of H & K advocates, he had accused EACC of maliciously using the law to subject him to the criminal justice system as well as embarrassment.
Mr Mburu, who was arrested on July 25 and held at the Nairobi Area Police Station, has accused EACC of fabricating allegations against him.
When the matter came before Justice Mwita, it had been transferred from the anti-corruption division to the constitutional and human rights one, where the judge sits.
Justice Hedwig Ong’udi, who transferred the case, said the declarations sought by Mr Mburu had nothing to do with the mandate of the anti-corruption court even if the EACC was the sued party.
“This division deals with criminal elements in relation to corruption and economic crimes, it also deals with asset recovery of public properties acquired through corruption and economic crime,” said Justice Ong’udi.
According to Mr Mburu and his company, EACC is arbitrarily acting on behalf of extortionists to threaten them with a view of having them concede to their demands.
In the case documents, they accused EACC of obtaining the original title for the disputed land from their lawyers Messrs Harit Sheth advocates by an undertaking that an exercise of forensic examination would take an hour only to retain it indefinitely.
Mr Mburu argued that EACC actions continue to threaten, violate, deny and infringe on his property rights and that he has been denied a fair administrative action.
He also accused EACC of swinging into a flurry of investigations into matter that has adjudicated upon and ignore the pending cases on the matter.