A legal battle has now placed one of the government’s most ambitious development plans on hold after the High Court stepped in to block its rollout.
The decision follows concerns raised about how the National Infrastructure Fund was created and whether it complies with the Kenyan Constitution.
The case was filed by Dr Margaret Gikenyi, J Benjamin, Eliud Matindi, and two other petitioners who questioned the legality of the fund. They argued that the process used to establish it ignored constitutional requirements and weakened the role of Parliament in managing public finances.
Their petition prompted the court to examine whether the executive acted beyond its powers.
Justice Bahati Mwamuye, sitting at the Milimani Law Courts, issued a conservatory order stopping any further steps toward implementing the fund.
In his ruling, the judge directed that the government must halt all actions related to setting up, registering, funding, or operationalising the National Infrastructure Fund until the case is heard and determined.
This order also applies to government officials, employees, agents, and any related entities.
At the heart of the petition is the claim that the fund was introduced through a State House communiqué rather than an Act of Parliament. The petitioners insisted that the Constitution is clear that public funds can only be created through legislation approved by Parliament.
They warned that allowing the fund to proceed in its current form would amount to executive overreach and weaken constitutional controls over public money.
The petitioners also raised serious concerns about the proposal to register the fund as a Limited Liability Company.
According to them, this structure could place trillions of shillings outside normal parliamentary oversight and beyond the routine audit powers of the Auditor-General. They described this possibility as creating a “shadow treasury” that could operate with limited scrutiny, increasing the risk of financial mismanagement.
Transparency and public participation were also highlighted as major issues. The petition claims that the public was not adequately involved in discussions about the fund, despite its potential impact on national finances and long-term development.
The lack of clear safeguards, they argued, could expose the country to misuse of funds without proper accountability.
Another controversial issue involved the proposed use of National Social Security Fund savings as seed capital. Kiharu MP Ndindi Nyoro and other critics opposed the idea, warning that workers’ pension contributions cannot be redirected to infrastructure projects without approval from the National Assembly.
They further cautioned that such investments could place retirement savings at risk, especially if projects fail or do not generate expected returns.
As part of the ruling, the court restrained several respondents, including the Attorney General and the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury, from taking any action to advance the fund.
This effectively froze the initiative until the legal questions surrounding it are resolved
.Despite the court action, the government has defended the National Infrastructure Fund strongly. Officials described it as a key tool for transforming Kenya into a first-world economy. President William Ruto had previously said the fund would reduce reliance on debt by attracting private investment from pension funds, insurance companies, and sovereign wealth funds.
He explained that every shilling of public money was expected to pull in up to ten shillings in private capital.
Before the freeze, the fund was expected to support major projects in agriculture, transport, and energy. These included large dams, expanded road and rail networks, extending the Standard Gauge Railway to the Ugandan border, and adding 10,000 megawatts of renewable energy.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for January 20, 2026. On that date, judges will decide whether the conservatory order will remain in place or be lifted, a decision that could shape the future of Kenya’s infrastructure plans.
Add Comment