Courts
Assets Recovery Agency wants law firm to surrender Sh124 million in money laundering probe
Mose and Company Advocates is accused of receiving the money under the guise that it was payment made by a Chinese firm for the supply of Tantallite Niobium from DRC

The Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) has moved to court seeking to forfeit Ksh 124 million held in the accounts of a Nairobi law firm, which it suspects to be proceeds of crime and money laundering.
Mose and Company Advocates is accused of receiving the money under the guise that it was payment made by a Chinese firm, Yingcheng (Shenzen) International Trade Company Limited, for the supply of Tantalite Niobium Ore by Sanjola Company Ltd.
ARA investigating officer Bernard Gitonga revealed to the court that the law firm, acting as an escrow agent, had entered into a sale and purchase contract with Sanjola Company Limited for the supply of 84 metric tons of Tantalite Niobium Ore worth Ksh 129,198,000 in favour of the Chinese company.
In his affidavit, he says that on September 19, 2024, the agency received information that the two accounts held at Sidian Bank in the name of Mose & Company were holding funds suspected to be the proceeds of criminal activities and money laundering.
The agency obtained a court order on September 20, 2024, to investigate the source of funds and its destination.
He further says that the parties had entered into an agreement on November 9, 2023, and the law firm allegedly received the money but the mineral was not delivered and shipped to Guangzhou, China as agreed.
“The revelation is that the respondent did not deliver the said Tantallite Niobium Ore as per the contract but utilised part of it for purposes other than contracted,” he added.
According to Gitonga, the funds were acquired in disguise and concealed money laundering schemes executed in an effort to conceal the nature, source , location, destination, disposition and movement of the illegitimate acquisition of the funds contrary to the provisions of Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act.
He added that ARA investigations revealed complex fraud and money laundering schemes conducted by the respondent, its directors and associates rendering the funds proceeds of crime liable for preservation and forfeiture under Proceed of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act.
On October 31, 2024, Gitonga obtained a preservation orders vide a miscellaneous application E053/2024 preserving the funds subject of the application.
He told the court that there are reasonable grounds to believe the respondent’s banks account were used as conduits of money laundering contrary to Section 3, 4 and 7 as read together with Section 16 of Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act in an effort to conceal and disguise the nature, source, disposition or movement of illicit funds.
According to ARA, it is in public interest that the orders sought are granted and the funds forfeited.