Rights activists have petitioned the High Court to stop the Controller of Budget and other oversight institutions from approving county spending that breaches the 35 per cent personnel-cost ceiling.
Laban Omusundi, Ignite Kenya and Sheila Kendi accuse the Controller of Budget, National Treasury, Salaries and Remuneration Commission, Senate and Attorney-General of failing to enforce the fiscal limit despite repeated audit findings showing widespread breaches by county governments.
They want the court to declare spending above the ceiling unconstitutional, compel state agencies to enforce it, publish automated county payroll data, and stop withdrawals that breach the statutory wage bill limit.
The case names all 47 county governments as interested parties. Justice Julius Nang’ea has since certified the application for interim orders as urgent but did not grant the orders sought.
The judge directed the petitioners to serve the application and petition immediately and gave respondents seven days after service to file replies.
The dispute concerns Regulation 25(1)(b) of the Public Finance Management (County Governments) Regulations, 2015, which limits county spending on wages and benefits to 35 per cent of total revenue.
The petitioners cite Article 201 of the Constitution, which requires public money to be managed prudently and responsibly. They say the ceiling is intended to protect public finances and leave resources for development and services.
“The 35 per cent ceiling is a fiscal sustainability benchmark intended to leave at least 65 per cent for development/service delivery,” the petitioners say.
The Auditor-General reported that county governments spent Sh207.99 billion on personnel emoluments in 2023/24, equal to 45 per cent of total revenue. County executives spent 45 per cent and assemblies 42 per cent. Only four county executives and nine assemblies were within the 35 per cent limit.
The petition says Mr Omusundi began raising the issue with State agencies in August 2024. He later wrote to Treasury, SRC and the Attorney-General, but says the responses did not produce effective enforcement.
The petitioners cite a Controller of Budget response saying that stopping county transfers falls under the Cabinet Secretary for Finance under Article 225(3) of the Constitution.
The petition seeks declarations that approvals or facilitation of county wage expenditure above the ceiling are unconstitutional and void. It also seeks orders compelling the Controller, Treasury, the Senate, and the Attorney-General to enforce the limit.
Another proposed remedy is publication of automated and itemised county payroll information. The petitioners say public access to payroll data would allow scrutiny of salaries, allowances, benefits and other personnel payments.
The Controller of Budget said in February 2026 that continued use of manual payroll systems poses a significant risk to efforts to reduce county wage bills to the statutory 35 per cent, and called for stronger payroll controls and automation.
More recent official data show that 42 counties spent between 37 per cent and 63 per cent of their revenues on salaries and allowances in the nine months to June 2026. The counties spent Sh171.36 billion on salaries and allowances against revenues of Sh386.59 billion.
In January 2026, the High Court ruled in another case that continued failure by national and county governments to maintain the statutory wage-bill-to-revenue ratio violated constitutional and statutory fiscal principles. The court declared budgets exceeding the prescribed ratio unconstitutional and void, but suspended that declaration until July 1, 2030.
That judgment also directed SRC to file annual affidavits through June 2030 detailing strategies and measures for achieving the 35 per cent ratio.
The fresh petition separately targets institutions involved in county revenue approvals and seeks enforcement measures against expenditure above the ceiling.
The petitioners argue that excessive personnel spending affects county functions, citing healthcare, roads, water, sanitation, agriculture, pending bills and stalled projects.
“The continued bloated wage bills have led to stalled development projects, poor healthcare services including shortage of drugs, poor roads and infrastructure, delayed payments to suppliers and accumulation of pending bills,” they say.
The respondents and interested parties have yet to file their replies in court. The case will return to court for further directions on October 12.
