Former Kiambu Governor Ferdinand Waititu will remain in prison for at least another month as the High Court deliberates on his latest bid for bond pending the determination of his appeal.
Waititu, who was convicted in February 2024 on corruption charges, was sentenced to 12 years in prison or ordered to pay a fine of Ksh 53 million. The former governor had initially sought release on bond, but his application was dismissed by Justice Lucy Njuguna of the High Court’s Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Division on March 3, 2025.
Following the rejection of his initial application, Waititu filed a fresh request for bond, arguing that he should be released as his appeal is pending. His legal team, led by lawyer Kibe Mungai, has since sought permission to amend this new application in a bid to strengthen his case.
On Wednesday, Justice Njuguna scheduled April 23, 2025, as the date for ruling on whether the amendment request will be granted. Should the court permit the amendment, Waititu will then be allowed to present arguments in favor of his bond application pending the determination of his appeal.
However, Waititu’s quest for freedom has been strongly opposed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). The prosecution maintains that the former governor should serve his sentence as handed down by the magistrate’s court, emphasizing the gravity of his corruption charges.
Waititu was found guilty of engaging in corrupt dealings during his tenure as Kiambu governor, particularly in relation to irregular awarding of county tenders. His conviction was seen as a significant move in Kenya’s fight against corruption, with the ruling serving as a warning to public officials involved in graft.
As the legal battle continues, Waititu will remain behind bars at the Industrial Area Remand Prison. The upcoming court decision on April 23 will determine whether he will be granted an opportunity to strengthen his bond application or continue serving his sentence while his appeal is considered.
The case has drawn considerable public interest, with anti-corruption campaigners closely monitoring the proceedings, as the ruling may set a precedent for other graft-related cases involving high-profile politicians
