Editor's Review

The Lady Justice noted that allowing the President powers to alter already existing frameworks without statutory basis would be in contravention of the rule of law.

The High Court in Nairobi has determined that President William Ruto's preferential allocation of Affordable Housing units to teachers and police officers is in contravention of the Constitution.

In a ruling delivered by Justice Patricia Nyaundi on Thursday, October 29, she determined that Ruto's pronouncements cannit lawfully alter the affordable housing allocation criteria without a statutory basis.

Consequently, she determined that Ruto's allocation of 20 percent of the Affordable Housing Units to teachers and police offices is unconstitutional

Join our WhatsApp Channel for the latest news updates

"In determining the petition, the following order therefore will issue: a declaration that the pronounecements made by the President on 3rd June 2025 and 13th September 2025, absent to a statutory or policy basis, are of no legal effect and cannot lawfully alter or supplement the criteria for allocation of housing units established under the Affordable Housing Act and its regulations," she ruled.

Read More

  1. Gachagua Makes Fresh Accusation About Ruto
  2. Gachagua Warns Winnie Odinga, Raila Junior Against Vying on Ruto-Linked Parties
  3. Bayern Munich, Ajax Set for Historic Clash at Talanta Stadium as Ruto Announces Opening

The Lady Justice noted that allowing the President powers to alter already existing frameworks without statutory basis would be in contravention of the rule of law.

A file photo of Affordable Housing Units.

"Executive authority may facilitate the implementation of the law, but it cannot alter the law or create rights and preferences outside it.

"To conclude otherwise would be to permit executive fiat to prevail over statutory framework enacted pursuant to the Constitution, an outcome fundermentally incompatible with the rule of law," the Lady Justice dertermined.

John Maina Ndegwa, Mashalls Tito Ongoya and two others had filed the petition to challenge the preferebtial allocation of the units.

The petitioners sought prayers including a declaration that the right to housing under Article 43 applies equally to all Kenyans and cannot be ring-fenced to specific professional groups without lawful justificatiom.

They further wanted the Court to issue an ordee of prohibition restraining the respondents, by themselves, their agents, servants, employees and representatives from implementing, enforcing, or acting upon the aforementioned directives and MoU.