In 2025, President William Ruto’s administration continued to face multiple legal setbacks as the courts quashed several government directives and regulations.
The rulings, including those related to the Attorney General’s powers, mining sector reforms, and public service regulations, highlighted constitutional violations and issues of public participation.
Curtailment of powers for Attorney General and PSC
One of the most significant rulings involved a move by the government to diminish the powers of the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the Attorney General (AG) over human resource management in State corporations and public universities.
In July 2023, the State Corporations Advisory Committee (SCAC), backed by the AG, issued a circular seeking to remove State corporations from PSC oversight, claiming they were not part of the "public service."
However, the High Court found this unconstitutional, asserting that both the AG and SCAC had unlawfully encroached on the PSC's constitutional mandate.
Attorney General Dorcas Oduor addresses journalists during the unveiling of the Government Critical Litigation and Loss Mitigation Review Committee on May 29, 2025 at the State Law Office in Nairobi.
Photo credit: Billy Ogada | Nation
The court ruled that the AG’s advisory, which suggested that the PSC lacked jurisdiction over State corporations’ human resource policies, violated Article 234 of the Constitution, which grants exclusive oversight to the PSC.
The court described the advisory as “illegal, null, and void,” emphasising that State corporations and public universities fall under the public service as defined in Article 260 of the Constitution.
The court further quashed Section 5(3) of the State Corporations Act, deeming it unconstitutional for attempting to strip the PSC of its mandated powers.
“It is crystal clear to me that the advice given by the second respondent (Attorney General) does not meet the constitutional threshold and is therefore illegal, null, and void,” the court said.
The ruling further noted that the AG’s advisory had disrupted the established governance framework, creating confusion in a sector already grappling with conflicting legal interpretations.
The case was brought by activist John Githongo and the Katiba Institute, who argued that the AG's directive undermined the Constitution.
The court’s judgment restored clarity, reaffirming that State corporations must comply with PSC regulations on personnel management.
Protests victims compensation taskforce
In yet another decision, the court quashed the establishment of a task force to compensate victims of protest-related violence.
While quashing the task force, the court affirmed that the mandate lies with the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR).
The establishment of the 18-member ‘compensation and reparation panel’, chaired by law scholar Makau Mutua, was announced through a government gazette notice dated August 25.
The government had planned to use the panel to expedite compensation to victims of police brutality during recent protests, a move critics had dismissed as politically motivated.
The panel of Experts to oversee compensation for victims of protests pose for a group photo during their swearing-in ceremony at KICC on September 4, 2025.
Photo credit: Wilfred Nyangaresi | Nation Media Group
Ruto had established the Presidential Panel of Experts on Compensation of Victims of Demonstrations and Public Protests, but the court said that while the President has a duty to protect human rights, he cannot unilaterally create such a body.
“The president is authorised to ensure protection of human rights under Article 131 and to ensure compliance with human rights obligations and may consistently call for a report from the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, including the design of a framework for reparations,” the court ruled.
More petitions challenging the establishment of the task force are pending judgment before the High Court at Milimani.
It had been mandated to design and establish an operational framework to verify, categorise, and compensate eligible victims.
It was also expected to engage with relevant stakeholders to ensure inclusivity and fairness in the compensation process and authenticate data on eligible victims.
Further, the task force was to propose legislative and institutional reforms to address protests and the culture of policing. Upon completion of its work, the panel was expected to prepare and submit reports to the President. The legal dispute is pending determination.
The court ruled that these guidelines violated the Constitution, as they sought to reassign constitutional functions of the PSC without legal justification.
“It follows therefore that if the impugned guidelines were premised on unconstitutional statutory provisions, then they would fail the constitutional threshold,” said the court.
LSK moved to court last year after the government issued Executive Order No. 3, which provided, among others, terms and conditions of service for boards and human resource management of State corporations.
In a gazette notice in May last year, Dr Ruto said the guidelines shall supersede earlier guidelines issued in November 2004.
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) challenged the guidelines, arguing they created a parallel public service under the President’s office. The court agreed, stating that such actions undermined the independence of the PSC and violated the principles of constitutional autonomy.
The LSK challenged the order, saying it was an attempt to take away the functions of the PSC and instead establish a parallel public service under the office of the President.
The court said as an independent commission, the PSC acts as the bulwark to protect the collectivity of public service from unwarranted intrusion or manipulation to ensure public service thrives on merit, professionalism, objectivity and impartiality.
“Permitting nibbling of its constitutionally protected mandate will increasingly weaken the Public Service Commission and leave it exposed to external interference yet the framers of the Constitution wanted a Public Service Commission that is independent with its specific functions ring fenced in the Constitution to shield them from encroachment,” said the court.
Mining sector regulations
The new rules increased application fees for mining permits and introduced higher royalty rates for various minerals.
The regulations were to govern the sector and raised application fees for large-scale prospectors and miners ninefold from Sh50,000 to Sh500,000 for some minerals.
The Kenya Chamber of Mines had challenged the regulations, arguing that they lacked proper public participation and consultation with industry stakeholders.
The court ruled that the regulations violated the principle of public participation as outlined in Article 10 of the Constitution, rendering them unconstitutional.
The government had intended the new rules to discourage speculation and illegal mining, but the court emphasised that transparency and inclusivity must be upheld in policy formulation.
The court said the Mining Regulations 2024, which comprised five key regulations, were unconstitutional as the principle of public participation was not complied with during the regulations' enactment.
“The regulations are collectively unconstitutional and in violation of the Constitution. The regulations are invalid and unenforceable. The mining regulations 2024 are quashed for violating Article 10 of the Constitution,” said the court.
Private Security Regulations nullified
The High Court also struck down the Private Security (General) Regulations, 2019, which mandated that private security guards undergo specific training and that firms comply with minimum wage laws.
The regulations had been annulled by the National Assembly in November 2019, but the Interior Ministry had attempted to enforce them through a subsequent directive.
The court ruled that the regulations were invalid and emphasised that they had not undergone adequate public participation. The ruling reaffirmed the constitutional requirement for inclusive policymaking processes.
President William Ruto during the launch of e-Citizen services, GavaMkononi app and Gava Express at KICC in Nairobi on June 30. Cabinet has ordered the closure of all existing pay bill numbers and the migration of government services to the eCitizen platform.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
School fees payment through eCitizen challenged
In April 2024, the High Court quashed a government directive requiring parents to pay school fees through the eCitizen platform.
The court found that the directive, which was implemented without public participation, violated the constitutional principle of inclusivity and was discriminatory to those unable to access or use digital platforms.
The government had argued that the move was aimed at promoting transparency and accountability in the management of school fees.
However, the court ruled that the directive was unconstitutional and added that the Sh50 convenience fee charged for using the platform was also unlawful.
The Court of Appeal later upheld this decision, rejecting the government's attempt to suspend the ruling.
“In the circumstances herein, we are not satisfied that the applicants (the government) have demonstrated that the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the High Court’s judgment is not stayed,” said the appellate court.
Treasury PS Dr Chris Kiptoo faulted the court’s finding that the ownership and operational control of the e-Citizen platform were unclear, despite evidence showing it was fully owned and managed by the government.
Dr Kiptoo maintained that public participation was an ongoing process integrated throughout the development and operationalisation of the eCitizen system.
He added that the finding of discrimination ignored the multiplicity of payment channels such as mobile money, credit cards, bank transfers, and agency banking, which were available to all users.
The PS submitted that the High Court failed to appreciate that the purpose of the directive was to promote transparency and accountability in the management of school fees and not to disadvantage any segment of the population.
According to the government, the e-Citizen platform is designed to be self-sustaining and operates without budgetary support from the exchequer, relying entirely on the convenience fee to meet recurrent costs such as hosting, system maintenance, SMS support, and connectivity.
The Treasury PS said suspending the convenience fee will deprive the platform of its operational funding, leading to the disruption of over 15,000 government services accessed by approximately 120,000 users daily.
Government advertising directive quashed
In another setback for the government, the High Court invalidated a directive issued by former Broadcasting PS, Prof Edward Kisiang'ani, which restricted public advertising in ministries and state corporations to the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC).
The memo, which directed all state entities to limit their advertising to KBC and Convergence Africa Media Ltd, was challenged by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) for failing to involve the public in the decision-making process.
The court ruled that the policy violated procurement laws and discriminated against private media by preventing them from competing for government advertising. It stated that such a policy shift required public participation, which had been absent in this case.
The court further noted that while revitalising KBC might be a good idea, excluding private media was detrimental to media plurality and undermined democratic principles.
The rulings collectively underscore the importance of constitutional adherence and public participation in Kenya's governance framework.
The court's decisions have had far-reaching implications, not only in reasserting the independence of the PSC and the proper roles of other constitutional commissions but also in reinforcing the need for transparency and inclusivity in policymaking.
The judgment on the AG’s powers and the PSC’s role, in particular, reaffirmed the legal principle that constitutional bodies cannot be bypassed or undermined by executive directives.
