The Tatu City defendants have lodged a thin veiled attempt to divert focus from pending dicey issues  among them their prosecution over alleged forgery and transfer of shares and directorship, by asking a Nairobi court to stop a lawyer from representing their opponents.

It is an application whose intention is to compromise the case(s), the court was told.

The court will determine if it will be dragged a second time into deciding if there is a conflict of interest as Anjarwalla & Khanna Advocates, Stephen Jennings and co. want the world to believe.

Havi takes on opponents in heated courtroom drama

The Ksh240 billion project has a history of being hit by a series of lawsuits, some, albeit side shows, pitting its foreign directors —  Jennings, Frances Holliday and Hans Jochum Horn — against their local partners former CBK governor Nyagah and billionaire businessman Vimal Shah and others.

Encumbered property

Nelson Havi who they want disqualified from the proceedings says  the aggression that he has pursued the foreigners and their lawyer(s) with, which led to the stopping of sale and transfer of encumbered property  and reversing illegal changes in registration at the Ministry of Lands and registrar of companies respectively, is not “hideous” and cannot be criminal.

He wondered how he was being labeled an architect of a scheme to defraud property yet he was at the forefront stopping its plunder.

Havi did not mention the recent case in which he pushed the defendants  into a corner and had them cited for contempt for stonewalling an impending audit, in the face of  a court directive!

Pandora’s Box

With the grit of false accusations still lingering in his speech, but with a cautious, academic  and downright humorous mien, Havi  gave us all a peek into the Pandora’s Box, the applicants (Anjarwalla & Khanna Advocates, Stephen Jennings…) opened in court. 

“They are extremely unhappy with what Havi has done…” the lawyer, speaking in third person addressed a hushed court.

He said the application was in “bad faith” and was a circumlocutory way to have the plaintiffs deprived of a lawyer of their choice.

There have been previous attempts to remove him! A consistent and deliberate attempt to bar him from appearing, Havi said.

Charge the applicants

He reminded the court of a matter being handled elsewhere where the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) ” had already made a recommendation to charge the applicants,” read,(subjects) over an foiled attempt to transfer shares and directorship and have Tatu City property sold to other parties without the knowledge of their Kenyan counterparts.

“There is no recommendation either to charge Havi and he is as free as Chineke the bird…” the lawyer submitted.

He said his main interest has been to protect his clients and court should not be boxed into losing sight of the weighty issues surrounding Tatu City litigation.

In all the Tatu City litigation, Purple Saturn, Kofinaf, Galba Mining, Senate etc. they have persisted on their quest to deny the plaintiff legal representation of their choice, the court heard.

A ruling will be delivered “on notice.”