The High Court has ordered the forfeiture to the State of a Toyota Vitz that police say was used to transport about 18 kilograms of bhang, in a ruling that underlines how the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) is increasingly targeting the tools used in drug trafficking, not just the proceeds.

Justice Joseph Biomdo of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Division in Nairobi declared the vehicle an "instrumentality" of crime and directed the Director General of the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA) to transfer its registration to the agency, The Star reported on Tuesday, October 27, 2026. The ARA was also awarded costs.

The 2022 interception

According to the ruling as reported, police intercepted the car on June 10, 2022, at Kenol along the Embu-Nairobi highway. Officers found three bales of cannabis sativa, wrapped in yellow sellotape and weighing about 18 kilograms, hidden in the boot.

The two occupants, the driver Kevin Makuli Vinyenye and the vehicle's registered owner Miriam Omwoso Aywa, were arrested and charged with trafficking in narcotic drugs. The criminal case is separate from the forfeiture suit, and the two have not been convicted.

The ARA moved to court through an originating motion dated March 9, 2026, under the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act (POCAMLA). It argued that the car was both an instrument used to commit the offence and a product of criminal proceeds.

Bank inflows not proven to be dirty money

The agency told the court that forensic analysis of the owner's bank accounts showed suspicious movements of Sh2,056,900 through an Equity Bank account between January 2021 and October 2022, and Sh3,522,600 through a Co-operative Bank account between February 2021 and October 2022.

The judge was not persuaded on that limb. He found that "no evidence was provided linking the funds to any criminal enterprise or activity," meaning the agency failed to prove that the car had been bought with proceeds of crime.

Owner's defence rejected

Aywa opposed the application, saying she bought the car in October 2020 on hire-purchase using savings, income from lawful trade and a soft loan from family. She argued that the driver had exclusive control of the vehicle for domestic errands and invoked the "innocent owner" protection under Section 92 of POCAMLA. She also argued that forfeiture was premature while her criminal trial was still pending.

Justice Biomdo rejected those arguments. Because she was inside the car when the drugs were found, he held, there was an overwhelming presumption that she knew about the cannabis, and he characterised the offence as a joint operation by both occupants. He found it proven on a balance of probabilities that the vehicle was "directly used and functional in the commission of the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs."

Civil forfeiture runs separately from criminal trials

The ruling illustrates a key feature of Kenya's asset recovery law: civil forfeiture under POCAMLA is decided on a balance of probabilities and can proceed even before a criminal case is concluded. The ARA has used the same route in other narcotics cases, including against a vessel seized with a large methamphetamine haul off the Kenyan coast.

The owner can still challenge the decision on appeal, and her criminal trial on the trafficking charge will continue on its own track.

Photos: Matti Blume via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0 (Toyota Vitz, illustrative); The Star (gavel).