On 20 August 2025, four Kenyan citizens filed a constitutional petition in the High Court in Nairobi, challenging the creation of the Presidential Multi-Agency Team on War Against Corruption. The petitioners are Dr. Magare Gikenyi, Eliud Karanja Matindi, Philemon Abuga Nyakundi, and Dishon Keroti Mogire.
They went to court after President William Ruto issued an executive proclamation on 18 August 2025 establishing the team. According to the President, the team would fight corruption, economic crimes, and related offences.
Why the petition was filed
The petitioners say the President acted outside the Constitution. They argue that Article 132 does not give the President power to create anti-corruption bodies. That work, they say, belongs to the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission under Article 79 and the EACC Act.
They also claim that placing the team under the Executive compromises the independence of constitutional offices like the EACC, the Central Bank of Kenya, and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The petition further raises concerns about money. The team was to be funded from budgets of state agencies and “other sources.” The petitioners argue this is unconstitutional since Parliament did not allocate the money through the normal budget process. They also worry that the phrase “other sources” is vague and not transparent.
The wider concerns
The petitioners cite Auditor-General reports that had linked the Executive Office of the President to questionable spending in the past. They fear the new team could shield the presidency from scrutiny or even be used for political witch hunts.
They also say it duplicates the roles of existing agencies like the EACC, Asset Recovery Agency, Financial Reporting Centre, and Directorate of Criminal Investigations. They describe it as a misuse of scarce public resources.
What the court said
The matter was placed before the High Court at Nairobi, Constitutional and Human Rights Division. It was certified as urgent and scheduled to be heard during the court vacation. The petitioners sought interim conservatory orders to suspend the work of the team while the case is being heard.
At the time of filing, the presiding judge had not delivered a final judgment. The court acknowledged urgency but reserved further directions and orders for the hearing. The petitioners urged the court to move swiftly to protect the Constitution from what they termed a serious violation.
The reasoning raised before the court
The petitioners insist the Constitution is supreme and every person, including the President, is bound to respect it. They rely on Article 2(4), which declares any act or law inconsistent with the Constitution as void. They also invoke Article 3, which obliges everyone to defend the Constitution.
The High Court has been asked to declare the proclamation unconstitutional, null and void, and to bar all state agencies named in the proclamation from taking part in the team.
What next
The petition now awaits a hearing on its merits. The High Court will be required to decide whether the President has the authority to establish such a team and whether it contravenes the Constitution. This case is of great public interest. It addresses the separation of powers, the independence of constitutional commissions, and the extent to which the Executive can go in combating corruption. Read the whole case file HERE
Leave a Reply