Nairobi TikToker Accused of Extorting Local Bank Loses Bid to Lift Gag Orders against Him

Nairobi TikToker Accused of Extorting Local Bank Loses Bid to Lift Gag Orders against Him

  • A court in Nairobi has dismissed an application by a popular TikTok activist who sought a review of gag orders issued against him
  • The activist, Gitonga Archives, was slapped with the gag orders after he was charged with demanding KSh 500,000 from a media service provider linked to a local bank
  • Gitonga filed a review of the gag orders, arguing that they violated his right to freedom of expression

Don't miss out! Join Tuko.co.ke Sports News channel on WhatsApp now!

Nairobi: A popular TikTok activist has suffered a major setback in his ongoing legal battle with a local bank.

Joseph Gitonga in court (left) and the Milimani Law Courts building (right).
The court issued gag orders against the activist (pictured) last week after he was accused of extortion. Photos: Zipporah Weru (TUKO), Kenyan Judiciary
Source: UGC

The activist, Joseph Gitonga, popularly known as Gitonga Archives, is facing accusations of attempting to extort a media service provider linked to the Cooperative Bank of Kenya, of KSh 500,000.

What orders were issued against TikToker Gitonga Archives?

He was arraigned in court on Friday, August 8, after which a gag order was issued against him. He, however, filed an appeal seeking a review of orders barring him from publishing any material about the bank and its staff.

Read also

Kenyan newspapers review, August 14: Man who won KSh 424m plans to resign from work, drill boreholes

But on Thursday, August 14, a Nairobi court dismissed the application by the TikToker. Senior Resident Magistrate Georgina Opakasi declined to review the gag order that was issued by Senior Principal Magistrate Sharon Ouko.

Gitonga hoped to overturn the order, arguing that it violated his right to freedom of expression.

Through his lawyers, Joshua Nyamori and Black Omanga, the TikTok activist argued that the gag order infringed on his rights under Articles 50, 33, and 24 of the Constitution, which protect the Bill of Rights.

“The court’s order has killed me digitally,” Gitonga told the court.

He also claimed that the police had deleted videos from his TikTok account and changed his username to Ng'ombe, destroying his livelihood.

However, the prosecution opposed the application, insisting that freedom of expression is not absolute as per Article 33(2) of the Constitution.

Why court declined to lift gag orders against Gitonga Archives

Read also

Bethuel Chesir: High Court orders production of missing Marakwet East MP’s PA, dead or alive

The court agreed with the prosecution, noting that the matter had already been heard and determined by another court.

“This is a matter that was canvassed before Court Number 3 on the 8th of August 2025. From the ruling, it is obvious that the issues raised are similar to those raised in the application before this court. It is essential to note that Court Number 3 is a court of concurrent jurisdiction with this court. Therefore, entertaining a review of her orders will be tantamount to this court sitting on appeal of those orders,” the court noted.
“It is trite law that a court cannot sit on appeal of a position of a court of concurrent jurisdiction, and to do so will amount to this court abdicating itself of its jurisdiction,” it added.
TikTok activist Joseph Gitonga in court
The magistrate said the TikTok activist should have filed his appeal at the High Court. Photo: Zipporah Weru.
Source: Original

According to the magistrate who dismissed the application for review of the earlier ruling, Gitonga’s only legal recourse was to appeal to the High Court.

Read also

Kenyan newspapers, August 13: DCI officer arrested after losing firearm while revelling with woman

“It is fundamental that the dignity and integrity of the court process are preserved, and this court will be rendered in other ways if it proceeds to entertain the application. Therefore, the application to review the court order made by court number three on the 8th of August 2025 is disallowed, for the good of the court,” she ruled.

Did Gitonga Archives attempt to extort Co-operative Bank?

When he was presented in court, the TikTok activist denied accusations of demanding Ksh 500,000 from Amos Hunja Mwangi, a media service provider linked to the bank.

The prosecution said the activist, with another person not before the court, made the demand with the intent to steal.

He was released on cash bail of KSh 50,000. Hearing for the case is set for October 16.

Source: TUKO.co.ke

Authors:
Zipporah Weru avatar

Zipporah Weru (Freelance editor) Zipporah Weru is a professional journalist with a bias towards human interest, human rights, crimes and court reporting with over 14 years’ experience in journalism. She is currently covering civil, criminal and constitutional cases across Nairobi courts. She holds a Diploma in Journalism and Public Relations from the Technical University of Kenya. You can reach her at zweru34@gmail.com.

Joshua Cheloti avatar

Joshua Cheloti (Editorial assistant) Joshua Cheloti is a multi-skilled journalist with over 5 years of experience in the media industry. He holds a Diploma in Journalism and Mass Communication and is pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in Mass Media and Communication at Mount Kenya University. At TUKO, he's an editorial assistant. Before TUKO, he worked at Nairobi Review as an editorial writer, at Hope Media (Hope TV and Hope FM) as a correspondent in Eldoret, Hivisasa.com digital content editor and online writer, at Biblia Husema Broadcasting (BHB), Eldoret as Radio Presenter. Email: Joshua.cheloti@tuko.co.ke

Page was generated in 3.7524929046631