Justice Patricia Nyaundi of the Milimani Constitutional and Human Rights Division ruled on Monday that CS Duale wilfully disobeyed conservatory orders issued on May 28, 2026, and confirmed on June 2, 2026.

The judge ordered Duale to personally appear before the court on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 11am for mitigation and sentencing following the contempt finding.

“On account of the foregoing, I find that in commissioning the ongoing construction of the facility at Laikipia, the 2nd Respondent (CS Ministry of Health) is in continuing contempt of the orders of the Court that issued on 28th May 2026 and confirmed on 2nd June 2026,” Justice Nyaundi ruled.

“Accordingly, the 2nd respondent (CS Health Duale) is required to attend Court on June 23, 2026 at 11am for mitigation and sentencing.”

While finding that the government disobeyed court orders, Justice Nyaundi said court directives are commands that must be obeyed and cannot be avoided through technical manoeuvres or by changing the actors involved.

“The obligation to comply attaches to the office holder personally, and it is the substance of the restrained conduct, not the identity of the collaborators, that determines contempt,” she said.

The court found that Duale, knowing that all construction activities at Laikipia Airbase had been stopped, proceeded with the project by attempting to alter the composition of those involved rather than halting the restrained conduct.

“Knowing full well that the Court required all construction activities at Laikipia Airbase to cease, he persuaded himself that he could continue by altering the composition of the actors rather than the substance of the conduct,” the court stated.

Justice Nyaundi added that Duale’s public statements, which were widely reported and never disavowed, supported the conclusion that he intended construction to continue despite the court orders.

“His public statements, widely reported and never disavowed, reinforce the conclusion that he intended construction to proceed notwithstanding the Court’s Orders,” she ruled.

The summons followed a contempt application filed by Katiba Institute and the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), accusing the government of brazenly defying court orders by allowing construction at the Nanyuki airbase to proceed and failing to disclose key documents relating to the Kenya-US arrangement behind the project.

The court heard that Duale had publicly stated, both in Parliament and during media appearances, that construction of the quarantine centre would proceed despite what he described as “noise”.

The court noted that on June 3, 2026, reports indicated that despite the orders, flights carrying medical equipment and specialised personnel had landed at Laikipia Airbase. Data presented before the court showed that at least six military aircraft, including C-130 and C-17 transport planes, had landed in Nanyuki since May 24, 2026, with three arriving after the court orders were issued.

Justice Nyaundi rejected Duale’s defence that any ongoing construction was part of Kenya’s independent national Ebola preparedness programme and had no connection to the suspended bilateral collaboration with the United States.

“As I understand it, what the CS seeks to do is to avoid compliance by recasting or recharacterising the ongoing construction,” the judge held.

“A court order is not an invitation to ingenuity; it is a command to be obeyed. Attempts to re-label or re-describe conduct so as to place it outside the reach of an order do not assist a respondent; the court looks to the substance of what was done, not the gloss placed upon it,” she stated.

The court, however, cleared Attorney General Dorcas Oduor of the contempt charge relating to disclosure, finding that the obligation under the earlier orders attached solely to Duale as Cabinet Secretary and that the AG could not be sanctioned for acts of her clients.

Following the ruling, Katiba Institute welcomed the decision, saying the court had affirmed the importance of respecting judicial orders and upholding constitutional safeguards in government projects.

The organisation said disclosures made during the proceedings raised questions over how the project was initiated without key assessments and public accountability measures being undertaken.

Katiba Institute Executive Director Nora Mbagathi said the ruling reinforced the need for public institutions to operate within the law.

“We are witnessing a profound disrespect for Kenya’s sovereignty and our constitutional rule of law,” Mbagathi said.

“The fact that construction continued in direct violation of a High Court order shows that the government believed it could operate entirely above the Kenyan judicial system. Today’s ruling sends a clear message: public health initiatives must bow to constitutional accountability, transparency, and the rule of law.”

Katiba Institute maintained that the case was not opposed to public health preparedness but sought to ensure government projects comply with constitutional requirements, including transparency, accountability and lawful decision-making.

The institute called for an immediate halt to all activities at the Laikipia Airbase site pending further directions from the court.

President William Ruto had publicly acknowledged approving the arrangement after a request from US President Donald Trump, describing it as a partnership “with friends who have walked with Kenya for 30 to 40 years.”

The post Health CS Duale found in contempt of court over Laikipia Ebola facility, ordered to appear for sentencing Tuesday appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The court’s recent decision by Justice Josephine Mongare of Machakos High Court  is a dramatic reversal of fortune for the high-profile deal after four consecutive failed attempts to halt it in Nairobi courts this year.

Justice Mongare issued the interim orders restraining the Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK), Diageo Kenya Limited, and three other respondents  stopping any steps toward completing the transaction pending the hearing of a petition filed by Christine Irungu.

“In the interim and pending the inter partes hearing and determination of this Application, a conservatory order is hereby issued restraining the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents, whether by themselves, their directors, officers, agents, servants, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates or any person acting on their behalf, from completing, implementing, registering, approving, transferring, disposing of or otherwise giving effect to the sale and/or transfer of Diageo’s controlling interest in East African Breweries PLC to Asahi Group Holdings Limited,” Justice Mongare ordered

Justice Mongare further ordered that the current ownership structure at EABL remain unchanged until the case is heard.

“A conservatory order is hereby issued preserving the ownership, control and shareholding status quo in East African Breweries PLC as regards the CAK and Diageo Kenya Limited controlling interest therein,” She ordered.

Judge Mongare further certified as urgent a petition filed by Irungu and directed that the application be served upon the respondents within seven days and fixed the matter for mention on July 2, 2026.

The recent orders come barely hours after the High Court in Nairobi dismissed a separate attempt by JILK Construction Company to stop the same transaction.

In that case, Justice Gregory Mutai of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division rejected JILK Construction’s application for conservatory orders, finding that the company’s grievances arising from a terminated 2017 Kisumu brewery construction contract had no connection to the proposed share sale.

“I share the same view as my brother Judge Bahati Mwamuye in the Bia Tosha matter, that no nexus has been shown between the impugned transaction and the petition now before the court,” Justice Mutai ruled.

JILK had argued that the acquisition should be suspended pending a human rights audit under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

However, the court held that the principles did not have binding legal force capable of stopping the transaction.

Justice Mutai further held that public interest favored completion of the deal.

“In my view, public interest favors the conclusion of the transaction, as the transaction shall have a significant public finance impact,” the judge said, noting that the transaction could generate approximately Sh42 billion in Capital Gains Tax revenue.

The JILK case was one of several legal challenges mounted against the proposed acquisition this year.

Earlier, Bia Tosha Distributors, a former EABL distributor locked in a decade-old distribution rights dispute, had three injunction bids thrown out, the last as recently as June 2, when Justice Mutai dismissed its application, ruling that had elected to pursue relief at the Court of Appeal and could not return to the High Court to seek similar orders.

The transaction had been awaiting final approval from the Competition Authority of Kenya after reportedly receiving clearance from regulators in Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority.

The transaction, valued at approximately $2.3 billion (Sh340 billion), would see Asahi acquire Diageo’s 65 per cent controlling stake in the Nairobi Securities Exchange-listed brewer.

The deal, announced in December 2025, had been awaiting final approval from the Competition Authority of Kenya after reportedly receiving clearance from regulators in Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority.

The deal is expected to generate approximately Sh42 billion in capital gains tax for the Exchequer, making it one of Kenya Revenue Authority’s biggest single-transaction windfalls.

EABL had repeatedly told investors that completion was expected in the second half of 2026.

At the time of going to press, CAK, EABL and Diageo had not filed responses or issued public statements on the Machakos order.

The post Machakos Court Temporarily Halts Sh340 Billion EABL Share Sale appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The High Court Civil Division ruled that sharing the allegations among colleagues damaged the plaintiff’s reputation and that attempts to distance oneself by stating that the information was only an allegation or that investigations were ongoing could not shield a person from liability.

The court found that defamatory content does not cease to be defamatory merely because it is presented as a report of accusations.

In the judgment, the court held that statements such as “it is alleged” and references to ongoing investigations are not a complete defence where the publication exposes a person to reputational harm.

The dispute arose after messages were posted in a WhatsApp group comprising senior URA officials, where allegations were made linking the plaintiff to a shooting incident allegedly arising from a dispute involving a “skirt”.

The plaintiff sued, arguing that the statements portrayed him as a person involved in criminal conduct and lowered his standing among colleagues and members of the public.

The court agreed that the publication was defamatory, holding that repeating allegations made by another person can still amount to defamation.

The judge noted that a person who republishes damaging claims cannot escape responsibility simply by saying they were repeating what they had heard.

The ruling emphasised the need for caution when sharing unverified accusations, especially within professional forums where information can affect an individual’s reputation, career and relationships.

The court further held that workplace or internal communication platforms, including WhatsApp groups, do not provide automatic protection from defamation claims.

The decision serves as a warning that digital platforms can carry legal consequences when used to circulate statements that harm another person’s reputation.

The High Court awarded the plaintiff UGX 100 million as compensation for the damage caused by the defamatory publication.

The post Man Wins Sh100m After “Shooting Over Skirt” Claims Shared Online appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Justice Gregory Mutai dismissed Mogo’s appeal against a Small Claims Court decision, finding that the agreement between the company and the tuk-tuk owner was a hire purchase arrangement and that the repossession and subsequent sale of the vehicle were unlawful.

The dispute arose after the tuk-tuk owner entered into an agreement with Mogo on September 16, 2023, where the company provided Sh446,250 towards the purchase of the vehicle while the owner contributed Sh50,000.

The tuk-tuk, registration number KTWD 674A, was registered in Mogo Auto Limited’s name and was to be transferred to the owner after full repayment of the loan.

Under the agreement, the owner was required to pay Sh7,027 monthly for 156 months, starting September 29, 2023, with interest charged at 1.39 per cent per month on a reducing balance basis.

The owner told the court he had paid Sh549,246, while Mogo maintained he had paid Sh479,609.

After some defaults, Mogo repossessed the tuk-tuk and sold it to a third party for Sh413,400, prompting the owner to move to court seeking a refund and compensation.

The Small Claims Court ruled that Mogo could not repossess and sell the tuk-tuk because the owner had already paid more than two-thirds of the hire purchase price without first obtaining leave of the court as required by law.

It ordered Mogo to refund Sh413,400, being the alleged resale value of the vehicle.

Mogo challenged the decision, arguing that the agreement was an asset finance arrangement governed by the Movable Property Security Rights Act and not a hire purchase agreement.

The company argued that repossession was lawful after the owner defaulted on payments.

However, Justice Mutai rejected the argument, holding that the nature of the transaction was determined by its substance and not the label placed on it by the parties.

The judge noted that the agreement identified the vehicle, set out a payment schedule and provided that ownership would only transfer after full repayment.

He further observed that Mogo had acknowledged in documents that the tuk-tuk had been issued under loan financing and was registered in its name pending repayment.

Justice Mutai stated: “What emerges from the foregoing is that, contrary to what the appellant alleges in the appeal, the tuk-tuk was registered in its name. It remained so until the respondent repaid the loan in full. In my view, the contract looked like a hire purchase agreement, walked like a hire purchase agreement, and quacked like one.”

The judge held that because the arrangement was a hire purchase agreement, Mogo was bound by Section 15 of the Hire Purchase Act, which prevents repossession after two-thirds of the purchase price has been paid unless a court order is obtained.

He ruled that Mogo acted unlawfully by repossessing and selling the tuk-tuk without filing a suit.

“What the appellant should have done was to file a suit. It did nothing of the sort,” Justice Mutai said.

The judge further found that the law provides a remedy where repossession is unlawful, allowing the affected customer to recover amounts paid under the agreement.

In dismissing the appeal, Justice Mutai said: “The upshot of the foregoing is that the appeal is completely bereft of merit. The same is for dismissal.”

He also ordered that the decretal sum deposited by Mogo be released to the tuk-tuk owner immediately.

The judgment was delivered on June 4, 2026.

The post High Court orders Mogo to refund tuk-tuk owner after unlawful repossession and sale appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) on Monday dropped its case against the nine suspects before Milimani Senior Resident Magistrate Irene Thamara, conceding it had found no evidence linking them to the assault and death of Brian Mwendo.

“Your Honour, the DCI did not find any evidence to charge any respondents in court; we pray the matter be marked as closed,” the prosecution told the court.

Mwendo had spent just a week hawking eggs along River Road when tragedy struck.

According to accounts that emerged, Brian was not involved in any dispute, he was peacefully going about his work selling eggs when he was brutally attacked by the bouncer.

The incident unfolded in the early hours of April 4 at Somer Club, a venue situated in the heart of the city near the Odeon Cinema, at around 3:00 a.m.

Bouncer Momanyi allegedly used a blunt object to strike Mwendo repeatedly, with the severity of injuries sustained to his head, chest, and stomach leaving the victim in critical condition.

Mwendo succumbed to his injuries the following day, April 5, at 7:41 a.m. while undergoing treatment at Kenyatta National Hospital.

The victim was a resident of Huruma Estate and a father of a 10-month-old child.

A post-mortem examination was subsequently conducted to establish the full extent of his injuries.

Investigators say the nine suspects, all employees of Somer Club, watched as the bouncer brutally beat Mwendo in full view of staff and patrons.

The prosecution alleged that they worked together to conceal the crime and cover up the killing.

The nine were arrested on April 10 and were being investigated for accessory after the fact to murder and conspiracy to commit a felony.

When they appeared before Magistrate Thamara on April 13, prosecuting counsel Virginia Kariuki told the court that the nine suspects had failed to report the assault and initially ignored police summons requiring them to record statements.

The court had then ordered their detention for five days as investigations continued.

Monday’s proceedings, however, marked the end of the road for the case against the nine suspects Maxwell Mwanzi, Esther Wanjiru, Sheril Okello, Jedida Kamau, Grace Mutheu, Rosemary Wambui, Mary Muhonja, Monica Wanjiku and Catherine Mutheu.

The DCI informed the court that preliminary investigations had confirmed the assault was carried out by bouncer Momanyi alone, using a blunt object.

The nine had been arrested solely because they were present at the scene and were believed to be witnesses, not perpetrators.

The defence lawyer successfully urged the court to order the return of phones confiscated from the nine respondents and to direct the reopening of Somer Club, which police had shut down during investigations.

The prosecution did not oppose the return of the items, and Magistrate Thamara ordered accordingly.

The critical loose end in this case remains Momanyi, the bouncer at the centre of the killing, who is yet to be apprehended.

Nairobi Central Sub-county Police Commander Philemon Nyakombo confirmed that the suspect remains at large, saying: “The main suspect, the bouncer, is still on the run but we will catch up with him.”

Former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko, who had publicly condemned the killing, raised further alarm, alleging that Momanyi was known for violent behaviour and that just a day before the Somer Club incident, another individual had been assaulted by the same person.

The investigating officer also raised a red flag about the club’s management, noting they had been uncooperative throughout the investigation, raising the likelihood of interference with witnesses.

For the family of deceased Mwendo, a young father barely a week into a new hustle, justice remains painfully out of reach as police continue the manhunt for the bouncer who allegedly took his life.

The post Nine Freed, Bouncer Still on the Run: DCI Drops Case Against Somer Club Workers Over Egg Vendor’s Death appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Daniel Mburu Macharia, a senior officer attached to the DCI headquarters, has been released on a cash bail of KSh 1.5 million by the Makadara High Court after being accused of fatally stabbing his wife, Florence Nyagah, at their apartment along Lumumba Drive in Roysambu.

In a ruling rendered by Justice  Beatrice Kimemia freed the officer subject to strict conditions, including a prohibition from interfering with witnesses and a ban on leaving the court’s jurisdiction without express permission.

Macharia has since pleaded to a murder charge over the killing of his wife before the High Court.

The case dates back to the night of February 27, 2026, when the couple’s relationship took a fatal turn.

Investigations revealed that the couple had quarrelled over an unknown issue on the afternoon of February 27.

The dispute escalated and was reported to the deceased’s firstborn daughter and her sister.

Florence contacted one witness via WhatsApp video call and asked her to come and help resolve the matter, but Macharia told the witness they would settle the issue amicably.

Attempts to reach Florence by phone that night proved futile.

Macharia occasionally answered callers, claiming he and his wife were resolving an underlying issue, before both phones eventually went off.

On March 1, 2026, the deceased’s daughter and sister visited the house after failing to contact either party and discovered Florence’s body lying on the floor, covered with a blanket.

Inside the apartment, investigators found her body lying in a pool of blood with visible injuries.

According to initial findings, she had sustained three stab wounds on the left side of the chest and a deep open wound on the forehead.

A blood-stained knife, lacking a handle, was recovered hidden beneath the kitchen table and is believed to be the murder weapon.

Macharia escaped the scene for four days before surrendering to authorities in Naivasha.

Police alleged the suspect fled and switched off his phone before later handing himself in, believed to have been prompted by the widespread circulation of his photographs in the media.

A post-mortem conducted at Kenyatta National Hospital on March 2 confirmed that Florence died from stab wounds inflicted by a sharp object.

She was 43 years old and worked as a saloonist in the area.

During earlier court proceedings, Macharia’s defence counsels, Danstan Omari and Shadrack Wambui, argued that he suffers from mental illness and had been receiving treatment at Kenyatta National Hospital before being transferred to Chiromo Hospital.

Omari urged the court to treat Macharia as a patient rather than merely a suspect.

Prosecutors, however, opposed the application, noting that no medical documentation had been tendered to support the claim.

During investigations a magistrate initially ordered Macharia’s detention for 14 days at Kasarani Police Station as detectives continued investigations.

He has since been formally charged with murder before the High Court.

The post DCI Officer Accused of Stabbing Wife to Death Freed on KSh 1.5 Million Bail appeared first on Insider Bits News.

In his petition filed at Milimani High Court’s Constitutional and Human Rights Division on Friday, Awino is seeking urgent conservatory orders barring Wandayi from performing any duties as Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Petroleum pending the hearing and determination of his case.

“Pending the hearing and determination of the Petition, this Honourable Court be pleased to issue a conservatory order suspending the Respondent from office as Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Petroleum,” Awino states in his petition.

He further seeks an order restraining the CS from exercising his powers through any means.

“Pending the hearing and determination of this Application inter partes, this Honourable Court be pleased to issue a conservatory order restraining the Respondent, whether by himself, his agents, servants or any person acting under his authority, from exercising the powers and functions of the office of Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Petroleum,” the petition reads.

Additionally, Awino is seeking orders compelling CS Wandayi to forthwith surrender any authority over ongoing or impending petroleum importation processes to a neutral and lawful mechanism under the supervision of the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA), or such other body as the Court may direct.

At the heart of the petition is the controversial importation of 68,000 metric tonnes of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) RON 93 aboard the vessel MT Paloma in or around March 2026.

Awino contends the consignment was brought into the country under highly irregular circumstances, bypassing mandatory Pre-export Verification of Conformity (PVoC) requirements and failing to meet prescribed Kenyan fuel quality standards under KS EAS 158:2025.

Court documents show that on March 28, 2026, the Ministry of Investments, Trade and Industry issued an irregular waiver allowing deviations from critical safety and environmental standards, including limits on oxygenates, manganese, sulphur, and benzene levels.

The waiver further permitted the mixing of the substandard fuel with compliant stock already in the market, a move Awino argues exposed millions of Kenyan consumers to potentially harmful petroleum products.

Attached to the petition is official correspondence from the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum’s State Department for Petroleum to the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS), dated March 26, 2026, requesting temporary waivers on conformity certificates.

The letter cited disruptions caused by the ongoing conflict in the Gulf Region as justification for bypassing established regulatory safeguards.

The petition is further backed by a Presidential press release Notification of Presidential Action No. VII of 2026 which acknowledged with grave concern that duty bearers within the petroleum supply chain “may have manipulated data on in-country fuel stocks” to exploit rising global prices and public anxiety, creating a false impression of an impending supply shortage.

The statement confirmed that the scheme led to the irregular procurement of emergency fuel at a price significantly above the contracted rates and that arrests of principal officeholders were effected on April 2, 2026.

Despite the arrests and resignations of several senior officials implicated in the scandal, Awino argues that CS Wandayi has neither accepted responsibility nor stepped aside from office, and continues to wield immense power over the petroleum sector.

Awino, who describes himself as a public interest advocate, further tells the court that he was subjected to threats, intimidation, and physical assault after publicly calling for the CS’s resignation and accountability.

He has attached photographs of his injuries, taken at hospital, as evidence of violations of his constitutional rights to dignity, freedom of expression, and security of person.

“The acts of violence and intimidation against the Petitioner constitute a violation of his constitutional rights, including the right to dignity, freedom of expression, and security of the person as guaranteed under Articles 28, 33, and 29 of the Constitution,” the petition states.

Among the wide-ranging orders sought are declarations that CS Wandayi has violated multiple constitutional provisions including Articles 10, 28, 29, 33, 47, 73, 75, 153 and 232 of the Constitution, that the MT Paloma fuel importation was unlawful, irregular, unconstitutional, and null and void and that the CS is unfit to hold public office.

Awino is also seeking an order directing the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to institute appropriate investigations and proceedings against all persons found culpable, including the CS Wandayi Respondent.

The matter is pending hearing.

The post Activist Moves to Court Seeking Removal, Suspension of CS Wandayi Over Ksh4.8 Billion Fuel Scandal appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The lawsuit, lodged before the High Court at Kerugoya by a lobby group known as the Centre for Public Policy and Research wants orders quashing the election of Atwoli and all other persons purportedly elected as officials of COTU-K on March 14, 2026 during the 15th Quinquennial Governing Council Delegates Conference held at Tom Mboya Labour College in Kisumu.

The lobby group is also seeking a court declaration that the said elections are unconstitutional, invalid, null and void for contravening Articles 10, 27, 28, 35 and 41 of the Constitution

“The purported election of the Central Organization of Trade Unions (Kenya) (COTU-K), held on March 14, 2026 at Tom Mboya Labour College, Kisumu, is unconstitutional for contravening Articles 10, 27, 28, 35, and 41 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, and is accordingly invalid, null, and void ab initio,” the petition reads.

Additionally, it wants the Registrar of Trade Unions barred from registering, gazetting or publishing the names of Atwoli and any other persons purportedly elected at the conference.

Filed through B. Okoth & Company Advocates yesterday, the petitioners argues that COTU-K conducted its elections in blatant disregard of a mandatory electoral timetable set by the Registrar of Trade Unions through a circular dated September 25, 2025.

That circular established a clear sequencing for the 2026 Trade Union Election Cycle, branch elections were to run from January 5 to March 31, 2026, national elections between April 1 and June 30, 2026, and COTU-K elections to be held only after those processes were concluded, by August 30, 2026.

“COTU-K prematurely conducted its elections and announced officials on March 14, 2026, well before its affiliate unions had held their branch and national elections, and even before the official national election period had begun,” the petition states.

“No valid election of COTU-K officials can occur without delegates properly elected by affiliate unions.”

The petitioners explains that Kenya’s trade union electoral system is deliberately hierarchical by design.

Branch members elect branch officials, who then serve as delegates to national elections, whose winners in turn participate in electing COTU-K’s leadership.

By bypassing this sequence, the lobby group argues, COTU-K severed the democratic link between grassroots workers and federation leadership.

Critically, the petition reveals that branch elections for three major affiliated unions, the Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT), the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET), and the Kenya Medical Practitioners, Pharmacists and Dentists Union (KMPDU), remain incomplete, meaning the delegates who purportedly voted at the Kisumu conference were not lawfully constituted.

Beyond the timing irregularities, the petition catalogues a damning series of procedural failures it says rendered the entire exercise fatally defective.

Membership registers at both branch and national levels were never updated prior to the elections, a mandatory pre-election requirement under the Registrar’s circular.

No independent electoral boards or committees were established as required by the unions’ own constitutions.

Further, members were never formally notified of the offices open for contest, nomination papers were never reviewed for candidate eligibility, no voters’ register was ever published, no agents, observers or accreditation existed, and no official polling stations were designated or communicated.

“A voters’ register was never published. This is not a minor omission, it is a fundamental failure,” the petition states, warning that without it, “the process lacks transparency, invites manipulation, and effectively disenfranchises members who cannot even verify whether they are entitled to vote.”

The petitioner grounds its case firmly in the Constitution, arguing that the flawed process violated the right to fair labour practices under Article 41, the right to access information under Article 35, the equality guarantee under Article 27, and the right to fair administrative action under Article 47.

According to the court papers, their application seeking interim orders be certified as extremely urgent, with the lobby group warning the court that failure to grant the orders sought would result in irreparable harm to union members who have been denied their fundamental right to participate in the election of their representatives.

The matter is pending hearing at the Kerugoya High Court.

The post Petition Filed to Nullify Atwoli’s Sixth-Term Re-Election as COTU SG appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The petition by Dr. Magare Gikenyi and Eliud Karanja Matindi, a Kenyan resident in Bournemouth, United Kingdom, targets the entire chain of events that culminated in Meja’s appointment, from the Selection Panel’s shortlisting to President William Ruto’s gazette notice of February 27, 2026.

At the heart of the case is a simple but explosive question on whether can a sitting PSC commissioner be reappointed to the same commission in a different role, effectively extending his tenure beyond the six-year constitutional limit?

The petitioners say no, and they want the court to say so too, urgently.

“On March 4,2026, the 3rd Respondent started his tenure as chairperson of PSC upon taking the oath of office, which action is unconstitutional null and void.”

Meja was first appointed as a PSC member on January 16, 2025, via Gazette Notice No. 386, and assumed office on January 20, 2025.

Under Article 250(6)(a) of the Constitution, PSC commissioners serve a single, non-renewable six-year term.

The petitioners argue that by accepting appointment as chairperson, a new six-year term starting February 27, 2026, Meja would effectively serve until 2032, more than thirteen years in total as a PSC commissioner.

The petitioners had raised the alarm well before Meja’s appointment was gazetted.

On December 10, 2025, they wrote to the PSC Selection Panel contesting the shortlisting of four sitting commissioners, including Meja, for the chairperson vacancy.

On February 18, 2026, they submitted a formal statement to the National Assembly opposing his approval. Both interventions were ignored.

In their statement to the National Assembly, the petitioners warned that approval and appointment of Francis Meja as Chair of the Public Service Commission would therefore be a violation of Article 250(6)(a) of the Constitution and Section 7(4), Public Service Commission Act, which limit the term in office of a member of the Public Service Commission to a single term of six years.

The National Assembly nonetheless approved Meja’s appointment on February 25, 2026, on the recommendation of its Departmental Committee on Labour.

The petitioners argue that approval was a violation of Articles 10, 232, 233(3)(c and d), 249(1) and 250(3, 4 and 6) of the Constitution.

The petition invokes a binding precedent the petitioners themselves secured last year.

In Gikenyi B. & another v National Assembly & 6 others (Petition E018 of 2025), the High Court held that a serving member of a constitutional commission cannot apply for a vacancy in the same commission if doing so would breach the mandatory term limit.

All the current respondents were parties to that case.

The petitioners charge that all respondents “aided and abetted the 3rd – 6th Respondents’ impugned actions of applying, shortlisting, interviewing, recommending for nomination, the nomination, approval, appointment, and assumption to office of chairperson of PSC, knowing they were ineligible for appointment to that office.”

Through their urgent application, the petitioners are asking the court to suspend Gazette Notice No. 2573 and bar Meja from performing any functions as PSC Chairperson while the petition is heard.

In the main petition, they seek to have his appointment declared invalid, and ask for a permanent bar on Meja and three other commissioners, Mary Wanjira Kimonye, Boya Molu, and Dr. Francis Owino Otieno, from holding any state or public office in Kenya.

The matter has not yet been assigned a hearing date.

Katiba Institute, the PSC itself, and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission have been joined as interested parties.

The post Petition filed Seeking to Oust Newly Sworn PSC Chairperson Over Constitutional Breach appeared first on Insider Bits News.

The post Court of Appeal Suspends Prosecution of Lawyer Spencer in Sh100M Karen Land Dispute appeared first on Insider Bits News.