Egyptian Investor Seeks Release of Allegedly Fraudulent Funds

An Egyptian property developer, Elsaei Waseem Ahmed Ahmed, is embroiled in a legal battle to unfreeze bank accounts that hold Sh134 million, which he claims are essential for his ongoing business operations. The funds were frozen by a Kenyan court following allegations of fraud in a housing project deal.

Ahmed has petitioned the High Court to reverse the freezing orders enacted on December 3, 2024, arguing that they violate his constitutional rights to property. He specifically requests that Diamond Trust Bank be ordered to lift the freeze on his accounts, which contain both Kenyan shillings and US dollars.

The legal action against Ahmed was initiated by Rwandese investor Jean Baptiste Uwemeye and his children, who accused Ahmed of fraudulently acquiring over USD 1 million. They sought an injunction to prevent Ahmed from using or disposing of these funds, pushing for a criminal investigation into his activities.

Ahmed defends himself by stating that the money in question has been integral to his business, used for salaries, contractor payments, and other construction-related expenses. He insists that these funds were legitimately used for developing a 150-unit apartment complex, which he says was completed, sold, and occupied long before the current dispute arose.

He argues that the Rwandese investors have misrepresented the situation, alleging that they requested additional, costly modifications post-construction, which led to delays in handing over the property. These modifications, according to Ahmed, included luxury finishes and an unauthorized bar, conflicting with local urban planning regulations.

Moreover, Ahmed claims he was not given a fair chance to defend himself before the accounts were frozen, emphasizing that the funds have been utilized for the project they were intended for. He accuses the investors of not disclosing crucial details to the court, particularly the fact that the building was completed and that he had offered alternative solutions through out-of-court discussions, suggesting they sell the property to recover their investment.

Ahmed also highlights that the investors’ claims do not consider the additional expenses he incurred due to their specific demands, which have not been reimbursed. He warns that continuing the freeze on his accounts would not only cripple his business but also adversely affect his employees and other clients dependent on his company’s services.

The case continues to unfold, with Ahmed seeking to prove the legitimacy of his use of the funds and the Rwandese investors intent on reclaiming what they allege is money lost to fraud.