Former Kenya Film Classification Board (KFCB) boss Dr Ezekiel Mutua.
The High Court has struck out a case by Ezekiel Mutua on behalf of the Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK), saying he has no authority as he no longer heads the agency.
Ruling on a case where Dr Mutua accuses the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) of freezing a new MCSK bank account to which he is a signatory, Justice Roseylne Aburili stated that he cannot act or transact any business on behalf of MCSK because he was sacked as CEO.
Justice Aburili added that Dr Mutua had not challenged his termination in the Labour and Employment Court, and therefore is not the bona fide CEO.
Dr Mutua, who was on a Sh742,500 monthly salary, had a year left on his contract before MCSK’s board fired him on grounds of insubordination.
He was accused of refusing to proceed on paid leave and backing an attempt by some MCSK officials to initiate changes in the society's directorship, squabbles that triggered his contract termination.
Factions in nasty boardroom war
Music Copyright Society of Kenya CEO Ezekiel Mutua (center) with Kenyan artists during royalties’ distribution to artists in the first scientific calculated pay out based on audio-visual play and logs from the various media stations at Safari Park Hotel in Nairobi on January 25, 2024.
A public notice of Dr Mutua's termination was published on Daily Nation on May 9, 2025, by MCSK.
However, in an immediate rejoinder, Mr Mutua dismissed the notice as 'false claims'.
The announcement exposed a nasty boardroom war that has been ongoing between two MCSK factions fighting for control of the society, which collects an average of Sh200 million annually in royalties on behalf of Kenyan musicians.
Lazarus Muli leads the faction that sacked Dr Mutua while Ephantus Wahome, who issued a statement refuting Dr Mutua's firing, leads the other one. Both Mr Muli, a director at MCSK, and Mr Wahome claim to be chairman of MCSK.
Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK) chairman Lazarus Muli (seated).
As the conflict intensified, the Muli-led faction removed Dr Mutua as a signatory to two MCSK bank accounts.
Dr Mutua, backed by the Wahome-led faction, opened a new account with Equity Bank.
Muli's faction then wrote to Equity Bank, KRA, the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) and the Communication Authority of Kenya accusing the Wahome faction of fraudulently opening the account despite not being the bona fide management of MCSK.
Mr Muli and his board backed their claims with two High Court rulings.
Genesis of High court case
On August 16, 2024, Justice John Chigiti ruled that the Wahome-led faction could not assume directorship, leadership, or management of the society or transact any business on behalf of MCSK.
On December 8, 2024, Justice Njoki Mwangi issued a similar ruling.
Consequently, the Equity Bank account was frozen on KRA's instructions, forcing Dr Mutua to file a case in the High Court.
In his application, Dr Mutua stated that the KRA demanded that MCSK pay Sh18,763,361 in tax arrears.
In his affidavit, Dr Mutua stated that on or about February 10, 2025, MCSK and KRA had entered into a tax payment plan to settle the tax arrears.
A proposed structured settlement plan was agreed upon where a total of Sh6.6 million would be paid immediately through deductions from MCSK's two NCBA bank accounts. The remaining balance of Sh6,594,439 was to be settled in five equal monthly instalments of Sh1,318,887.80.
Dr Mutua stated that, following the proposal, MCSK had been making good faith efforts and "has diligently remitted payments in accordance with the agreed terms".
He, however, noted that, due to the wrangles within the society, the settlement plan had encountered 'temporary disruption' leading to the opening of the Equity account.
"Due to challenges arising from litigation involving the applicant (MCSK) including Milimani Commercial Court Case No. E1178 of 2024, and High Court Commercial Cases No. 698 and E730 of 2024 the Applicant encountered temporary disruptions affecting full compliance," stated Dr Mutua.
He accused KRA of freezing the Equity account without notice.
"Without prior engagement or warning, the 1st respondent (KRA) on the 5th of May, 2025, unilaterally issued an agency notice of and consequently froze the applicant’s account...The action was taken without allowing the applicant to be heard, contrary to the dictates of Article 47 of the Constitution, the Fair Administrative Action Act, and established principles of natural justice."
As such, he sought the court's intervention to have KRA unfreeze the bank account.
Judge dismisses Dr Mutua
However, while delivering her ruling on Wednesday, Justice Aburili took note of the wrangles within MCSK.
This was after the Muli-led faction through their counsel O’kubasu and Munene Advocates filed an application seeking to withdraw the case filed by Dr Mutua and also have the firm replace advocate Felix Okiri who was appointed by Dr Mutua to represent MCSK in the suit.
“Mr Felix Okiri, Advocate for Music Copyright of Kenya, has now confirmed to this court that there are governance issues and wrangles over directorship of the applicant company hence, he was instructed by Dr Ezekiel Mutua and not the Board of Directors...hence there is no resolution by the Board for the filling of these proceedings. On the other hand, Dr O’kubasu filed a notice of change of Advocates accompanied by a notice of withdrawal of suit dated 22/5/2025. And has filed an affidavit in support of the notice of withdrawal of suit, annexing a letter of termination of employment dated 3/4/2025 of the CEO of the applicant company, Dr Ezekiel Mutua, signed by Dr Lazarus Muli on behalf of the Board of Directors and members of the applicant company.”
After issuing her decision, the judge went on to caution Dr Mutua against abusing court orders citing the rulings by Justices Chigiti and Njoki Mwangi.
“This court has been shown an order dated 8/12/2024 in HCCOM E730/2024 wherein conservatory orders were issued suspending respondents from assuming directorship, leadership or in any manner whatsoever transacting the business of and on behalf of the applicant (MCSK) herein. Court orders once issued must be obeyed until set aside or vacated.”
