NAIROBI, Kenya – A financial storm has engulfed a prominent Nairobi law firm after investigators froze its client account, leaving millions of shillings trapped and raising urgent questions about the balance between state power and professional independence.
On August 7, 2025, the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) secured an ex parte order to block access to an Equity Bank account operated by Akedi & Olalo Advocates.
The move, obtained under Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. E3000 of 2025 at the Milimani Law Courts was based on suspicions of fraud and financial impropriety.
The sudden order has shaken clients and sparked debate within the legal fraternity over whether the action is a legitimate safeguard or a dangerous overreach.
The firm’s partners, advocates Samuel Olalo and Ronny Akedi, insist the freeze is not only unwarranted but also unconstitutional.
They argue that the order has paralyzed routine transactions, delayed settlements, and disrupted conveyancing deals, leaving innocent clients as collateral damage.
According to Olalo, “trust accounts are sacrosanct in legal practice, and freezing them without proof amounts to violating both property rights and due process.”
Kenya’s 2010 Constitution enshrines fair administrative action and the presumption of innocence, but those principles are increasingly colliding with aggressive financial investigations.
The DCI has defended such freezes as necessary to prevent illicit funds from vanishing before trial. Still, critics warn that freezing client funds before establishing culpability risks undermining public confidence in both the justice system and the independence of the bar.
Legal analysts point to Article 40 of the Constitution, which protects the right to property, and Article 47, which guarantees fair administrative action.
They also highlight the Advocates Act, which requires lawyers to separate client money into trust accounts shielded from personal use.
Interfering with those accounts, they argue, may not only breach constitutional guarantees but also set a precedent that leaves the entire profession vulnerable to investigative overreach.
This case is not an isolated incident. In recent years, several law firms have found themselves caught in the crosshairs of anti-fraud operations, with trust accounts frozen in connection to wider money-laundering investigations.
The cumulative effect, insiders say, is a climate of unease that threatens the very foundation of client-lawyer confidentiality.
For Akedi & Olalo, the reputational fallout may prove as damaging as the freeze itself. Even if the firm is eventually cleared, the association with fraud allegations could linger. For clients awaiting access to their funds, the stakes are even higher, with court timelines and commercial deals already disrupted.
As the Milimani court prepares to determine whether to maintain or lift the freeze, the decision is set to become a litmus test for the delicate balance between combating financial crime and safeguarding constitutional freedoms.
For now, a single law firm’s frozen account has reopened a national conversation on where justice ends and overreach begins.
