PCEA cleric seeks stay of contempt ruling against two senior church leaders

In an application filed under a certificate of urgency, Moses Ndegwa, the Parish Minister in charge of Muguga Parish and Moderator of Muguga Presbytery, is seeking to be enjoined in the case and to stay all consequential proceedings arising from a ruling delivered on November 26, 2025, by Justice Stella Mutuku.

In the ruling, the court found Rev. Dr. Robert Wakenya, the Secretary General of the PCEA, and Rev. Thegu Mutahi, the Moderator of the Church, guilty of contempt of court and ordered them to appear for sentencing on December 16, 2025.

On the scheduled date, the Moderator appeared in court and was allowed to address the court in mitigation. However, the judgment could not be delivered because the co-accused did not appear in court for reasons the court found satisfactory. The matter was consequently deferred, with the hearing for the absent party set for Thursday, ahead of judgment on the same day or at a later date.

Ndegwa argues that, by virtue of his ecclesiastical roles, he has a direct and substantial interest in the matter. He states that Rev. Mutahi is his Moderator, establishing a clear hierarchical and institutional link that gives him the requisite locus standi to participate in the proceedings.

He contends that he was neither a party to the original proceedings nor afforded an opportunity to present material evidence critical to the just determination of the dispute.

According to the applicant, he has since obtained confirmation that Benjamin Njoroge Mburu, who filed the suit, was not a member of the Kikuyu Township Congregation of the PCEA at the time the case was instituted on 6th April 2024, and therefore lacked the legal capacity to file the suit.

Ndegwa maintains that this information was not placed before the court during the hearing of the contempt application and that, had it been disclosed, the court would not have arrived at the decision delivered on 26th November 2025.

He is now asking the court to allow him to be enjoined so that he can file pleadings and documents, cross-examine parties, and adduce evidence in support of his position.

He is also seeking a stay of the impending sentencing for contempt pending the inter partes hearing and determination of his application.

Further, the applicant seeks a review, variation, and/or setting aside of the contempt orders, arguing that unless the matter is heard urgently and the orders stayed, he will suffer irreparable harm and the administration of justice will be compromised.

He maintains that no prejudice will be suffered by the plaintiff or other respondents if the orders sought are granted, insisting that the application is aimed at ensuring all material facts are placed before the court to facilitate a fair and informed determination.

The case is scheduled to proceed on Thursday.