Koskei, Amin, Ingonga, Oduor sued by Nairobi Hospital board over illegal interference

 

Nairobi Hospital board sues top state officials over alleged interference. March 19, 2026. [Boniface Okendo, Standard]

The Nairobi Hospital board members yesterday sued the Head of Public Service Felix Koskei, the Director of Public Prosecution Renson Ingonga, the Director of Criminal Investigations Mohammed Amin, the Kenya Revenue Authority, the Registrar of Companies, and the Attorney General Dorcas Oduor, citing interference with the private hospital.

A day after the Director of Public Prosecution Renson Ingonga withdrew charges against three members, Barcley Mogere Onyambu, Dr Magdalene Koki Muthoka, and John Nyiro Mwero, the hospital’s management, led by Gilbert Nyamweya, Akiyi Gaya, Prof John Mwero and the Kenya Hospital Association, accused the government officials of illegally implementing a coup.

 According to them, although the hospital has had internal wrangles, the courts have been the point of call.

However, in their case filed before the High Court, the board members claimed that on March 6 this year, it took a different twist when President William Ruto referred to them as crooks, conmen and charlatans.

They further said that Dr Ruto then vowed that he would ensure that they are kicked out and dragged to court with charges.

“ In the same public address, the President further declared, in unequivocal and categorical terms, that he had "instructed with clarity that persons involved in the affairs of the seventh petitioner would be 'removed' and "charged,” court papers read in part.

 The group led by Nyamweya further said that the President’s threats were buttressed by the State House Spokesperson, Mr Hussein Mohamed, who alleged that Koskei had been tasked to ensure stability and strengthen governance within the hospital.

According to them, this was an illegal state takeover of the affairs of a private company.

“ The petitioners aver that the cumulative effect of the foregoing public declarations and executive communications was to trigger and legitimise direct State involvement in the internal affairs of a private association, thereby blurring the constitutionally mandated separation between public authority and private corporate governance,” they continued.

The court heard that KRA allegedly started tax assessment, three directors were arrested and charged, and all their vehicles were placed under a caveat by the Asset Recovery Agency (ARA).

However, according to the Nairobi Hospital directors, the moves were premature as the DPP allegedly admitted in court that the investigations were incomplete.

Nevertheless, they further claimed that KRA allegedly started its own probe using the same claims that had been withdrawn in court.

They argued that all this was being done to exert pressure on them to relinquish their positions.

 The directors admitted that they were in court over the hospital’s management. They, however, questioned why the Executive was undertaking a parallel process to that of the court.

“ The Petitioners state that these actions were not undertaken through any lawful statutory mandate, nor were they grounded in any enabling legal framework. Instead, they constituted ad h o and extra-legal manoeuvres aimed at exerting State control over a private entity, justified solely based on alleged internal wrangles within the Hospital Community,” the court heard.

They were of the view that the issues bedevilling the premier facility can be resolved without the involvement of the State and its machineries.

At the same time, the directors said that the moves by the police and KRA were in violation of court orders in Kibera and the High Court in Nairobi, which barred the DCI from either summoning or questioning them.

According to them, the DPP and the DCI turned a blind eye to the clear orders and had three of them arrested on a Friday and charged on a Monday.

This, they argued, was an affront to legal process and fairness.

“ This sequence of events demonstrates that the criminal process has been inverted and abused, wherein charges are initiated first, and investigations conducted thereafter in search of possible offences, contrary to established principles of criminal justice,” they said.

The directors want the court to find that the arrests and detention were illegal and against court orders. They are also seeking compensation and an order barring the government from meddling with the hospital’s affairs.