Two Kenyans have moved to court to challenge plans to allocate teachers and the police 20 percent each of the affordable housing units as promised by President William Ruto, arguing that the move is discriminatory.
In a petition at the High Court, John Maina and Marshalls Ongoya argue that the allocation will create an unlawful preference for teachers and police officers over other citizens, undermining the principle of equality and non-discrimination.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi directed the two petitioners to serve the government and other respondents with the court documents within seven days.
They pointed out that on June 3, President Ruto announced that 20 percent of the affordable housing units developed under the programme would be reserved for disciplined forces, including the police.
Later on September 13, President Ruto presided over the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the Affordable Housing Board and teachers’ unions, allocating 20 percent of the units to teachers.
The petitioners argue that the allocations were made without parliamentary approval, legislative framework or public participation.
“The actions of the President amount to usurpation of the mandate of the Affordable Housing Board, which under the Affordable Housing Act, 2024, has the authority to manage and oversee the allocation of the units,” Mr Maina said in an affidavit.
In a meeting with teachers at State House on September 13, President Ruto made a number of promises including the allocation of the houses to teachers.
Mr Maina, a lawyer, wants the court to issue an order blocking the deals to ring-fence 20 percent of the housing units for teachers and the police.
He said it was in public interest to suspend the implementation of the directives and the MoU to safeguard equality, fairness, inclusivity and accountability on allocation of taxpayer-funded housing projects.
Mr Maina said the programme is financed through taxpayers’ money and public resources contributed by all Kenyans and they, therefore, have a direct and substantial interest in ensuring that the programme is implemented fairly, equitably and in accordance with constitutional dictates.
“Millions of Kenyans who contribute to the housing levy and other public funds have not been afforded equal opportunity to access the housing programme, thereby creating inequality contrary to Article 27 of the constitution,” he added.
The petitioners want the court to issue a declaration that the right to housing under article 43 of the constitution applies equally to all Kenyans and cannot be ring-fenced to specific groups, without lawful justification.
They also want the court to compel the Affordable Housing Board to design and publish a transparent, inclusive and non-discriminatory allocation of criteria for affordable housing units.
“An order of prohibition restraining the respondents by themselves, their agents or servants and representatives from implementing, enforcing or acting upon the said directives and MoU,” Mr Maina said.
