The High Court says missing tender records, unexplained payments and money transfers raise serious questions over Turkana procurement.
Nearly KSh696 million linked to alleged irregular Turkana procurement deals will remain frozen.
Justice Benjamin Mwikya Musyoki issued the preservation orders on September 18, 2026, after examining EACC’s evidence.
The Commission alleges public funds moved through companies before reaching private accounts.
Some payments allegedly covered goods and services investigators could not establish were supplied.
Others were followed by transfers to accounts associated with businessman Stephen Gole Lowoton.
The allegations involve 11 defendants and transactions spanning several years.
Lowoton is the first defendant and operates Napeyok Suppliers and Contractors.
The case has been building through earlier preservation proceedings dating back to 2025.
In September 2025, the High Court extended orders protecting millions from possible dissipation.
The latest ruling now places approximately KSh696.15 million under judicial protection.
Missing Goods
The most striking feature of EACC’s case concerns what investigators could not find.
The Commission says Trabamo Investments received KSh496.49 million between 2018 and 2024.
Yet investigators obtained payment vouchers supporting only KSh282 million.
That left KSh214.49 million without corresponding documentation, according to the Commission.
EACC alleges part of that money paid for goods or services never delivered.
The Commission also traced KSh209.55 million from Trabamo to Lowoton.
That movement became one of several financial trails presented before the judge.
Justice Musyoki said EACC had demonstrated “money trails from the government” to defendants.
Those trails allegedly continued into accounts linked to Lowoton and his associates.
The judge was equally troubled by gaps in procurement documentation.
Investigators reported missing tender documents, contracts, delivery notes and supporting records.
“Contracts of this magnitude, if genuine or regular, must have been accompanied with documentation,” the judge said.
That observation cuts to the heart of the dispute.
The court was not deciding guilt but testing whether the money needed protection.
For EACC, the missing paperwork strengthened its argument that public money was at risk.
For the defendants, those allegations remain matters requiring proof at trial.
Suspicious Timing
The investigation extends beyond Trabamo and Napeyok Suppliers and Contractors.
EACC also placed Kanalo Investment Limited under scrutiny during its investigations.
Kanalo was incorporated on July 16, 2023, according to the Commission.
It allegedly received KSh357.93 million from Turkana County after its incorporation.
Its first payment allegedly arrived just 19 days after registration.
That timing raised questions about whether ordinary procurement procedures could have been completed.
EACC also questioned financial statements allegedly submitted by the newly incorporated company.
The documents reportedly covered 2020 and 2021, before Kanalo legally existed.
The Commission further alleged that KSh82 million moved from Kanalo to Lowoton.
Lotiman Contractors and Suppliers Limited presented another strand of the investigation.
EACC alleges Lotiman received KSh259.15 million from Turkana County during 2019.
Investigators obtained payment vouchers accounting for only KSh111.8 million.
The Commission alleges falsified documents were used during that procurement process.
Some of Lotiman’s money subsequently moved into Lowoton and Kamais’ joint account.
Gimly Suppliers Limited also attracted scrutiny over another KSh124 million payment stream.
EACC says the relevant procurement documents were not supplied to investigators.
It further alleges that KSh47.991 million moved from Gimly’s director to Lowoton.
Taken together, the transactions painted a picture requiring closer judicial examination.
The judge therefore found that EACC had raised a “genuine and arguable case”.
The KSh230 Million
The largest individual amount preserved is KSh230 million held at Co-operative Bank.
The account belongs to Juliah Kamais Ekaran, the second defendant.
Lowoton said the money came from legitimate Hotel Gloste business activities.
He told the court that the hotel accumulated funds through successive fixed deposits.
Those deposits allegedly began in 2017 and continued through 2023.
About KSh184 million was eventually transferred into the joint fixed deposit.
But the explanation left the judge with another unanswered question.
Where did the hotel obtain the money that generated those substantial deposits?
The court noted that the account showed KSh18.97 million at the end of 2017.
It found that figure required greater explanation against subsequent wealth accumulation.
“The defendants have not placed before the court books of accounts,” Musyoki said.
Those records, the judge suggested, could have demonstrated the hotel’s legitimate income.
Instead, the source of the wealth remained an issue for the substantive hearing.
The court also examined KSh33.332 million transferred from Lotiman into the joint account.
Lowoton described the payment as repayment for financing he had provided Lotiman.
The financing agreement was dated October 2, 2023, according to the ruling.
But alleged irregular payments involving Lotiman stretched from 2018 through 2024.
That chronology prevented the court from completely separating the repayment from disputed funds.
Freeze Stays
The judge ultimately found that EACC had established a prima facie case.
He also found potential dissipation could undermine eventual recovery of public money.
EACC estimates the alleged loss from the transactions at KSh1.237 billion.
If the preserved money disappeared, tracing and recovery could become considerably harder.
That process could also impose additional costs on the public purse.
The judge therefore found public interest supported continued preservation of the funds.
He noted that even recoverable financial claims require protection involving public resources.
The court also rejected the defendants’ attempt to vary preservation orders through a replying affidavit.
Justice Musyoki said variation required a properly filed and prosecuted substantive application.
A tax demand from KRA also failed to persuade the court to release Trabamo’s funds.
The judge reasoned that some disputed payments themselves formed part of the tax calculations.
He therefore found insufficient grounds for lifting the restrictions.
The final orders cover six accounts holding approximately KSh696.15 million.
The defendants must file defences, documents and witness statements within 14 days.
EACC then has seven days to respond after receiving the final defence.
READ ALSO: Court Freezes KSh195 Million Nairobi Property in Middle East Bank Auction Dispute
The matter will proceed to pre-trial directions before the High Court.
The ruling does not establish that any defendant committed corruption or fraud.
Those allegations remain unresolved until evidence is tested during the substantive proceedings.
For now, however, nearly KSh696 million remains locked behind a judicial order.
PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.
