Blow to Ruto’s Former Advisers as High Court Rejects Return to Office for Six Months

IB Reporter — Tue, 03 Feb 2026 17:41:00 +0000

Former President William Ruto’s advisers suffered a major setback after the High Court rejected their second attempt to stay in office for six months to allow handovers.

Justice Bahati Mwamuye on Wednesday dismissed the January 27 application by 21 Presidential Advisors, ruling that their request was illegal and lacked constitutional backing.

“The court finds the application misconceived and outside the law. It cannot be entertained,” Justice Mwamuye said, emphasizing that public offices must operate within the limits of the Constitution.

The advisors had sought to challenge their sacking from the Presidency, arguing that their removal was unlawful.

However, the court found that their positions were not constitutionally or statutorily guaranteed, making their claim unsustainable.

The advisers including David Ndii, Monica Juma, Jaoko Oburu, and Harriet Chigai, argued that a stay would allow them to comply with the court’s orders, facilitate proper handover, and support their planned appeal.

The Attorney General and the Public Service Commission backed them, but the Katiba Institute opposed the application, citing res judicata.

Justice Mwamuye rejected their claims of “new arguments”:

“The same arguments canvassing appeal, structural interdict, prejudice, support for the President, handover, irreparable harm and prejudice, and the others are a rehash of what was covered extensively on 22/01/2026,” he ruled.

He warned against repeated applications to bypass unfavorable rulings.

“While the Party making an Application may change, if the substance of what is being sought and the grounds or arguments in the support of the same are identical, then the doctrine of res judicata bars that second attempt.”

The ruling emphasized finality in court proceedings:”Res Judicata is an important aspect of our legal order. It preserves scarce judicial time, promotes certainty and uniformity, and prevents a matter being caught up in an unending cycle of litigation.”

In a related ruling, the court dismissed contempt charges against Ndii and Chigai over social media posts after the January 22 judgment.

Justice Mwamuye said Ndii’s posts were “a mixture of his expression of dissatisfaction with the outcome… and a comment that, while somewhat distasteful, was an expression of his personal experience with respect to an incident that occurred in the year 2017.”

Chigai’s actions, the court found, had “two equally persuasive interpretations” and did not show she was continuing in a quashed role.

“Social media comments can have real-life negative consequences… Such comments must strike the balance between our constitutionally protected freedom to express our views… and the need to protect and promote the proper administration of justice,” the judge cautioned.

The dispute stems from a case filed by the Katiba Institute challenging the constitutionality of the Presidential Advisor offices.

The January 22 judgment quashed the positions, with advisers’ immediate oral stay applications rejected.

The new written application has now also been dismissed, leaving the judgment fully in force.

Advisers retain the right to appeal the substantive judgment to the Court of Appeal.

The post Blow to Ruto’s Former Advisers as High Court Rejects Return to Office for Six Months appeared first on Insider Bits News.

David Ndii, 20 Other Presidential Advisors Move to Court to Stop Ruling on Their Appointments

IB Reporter — Wed, 28 Jan 2026 19:29:17 +0000

Economist David Ndii and 20 other presidential advisors have rushed to court seeking urgent orders to halt the implementation of a judgment that declared their appointments unconstitutional and illegal.

The 21 advisors filed the application under a Certificate of Urgency on January 27, five days after High Court Judge Bahati Mwamuye ruled that their offices were invalid and ordered the immediate cessation of their salaries, allowances and benefits.

Joining Ndii in the application are Monica Juma, Jaoko Oburu, Makau Mutua, Harriet Chigal, Ali Mahat Somane, Abdi Guliye, Dominic Menjo, Sylvia Kangara, Edward Kisiang’ani, Joseph Boinnet, Sylvester Kasuku, Nancy Laibuni, Kennedy Ogeto, Augustine Cheruiyot, Henry Kinyua, Joe Ager, Karisa Nzai, Mohammed Hassan, Steven Otieno, and Christopher Doye Nakuleu.

The advisors are seeking a 180-day suspension of the January 22 judgment to enable them to lodge an appeal before the Court of Appeal.

“This honourable court delivered its judgment on 22nd January 2026 invalidating the offices and appointments held by the Interested Parties/Applicants and issuing coercive and structural orders with direct and far-reaching operational consequences,” the application states.

According to the advisors, failure to grant the stay would render their planned appeal meaningless.

“Absent interim protection, the intended appeal risks being rendered illusory, not by delay or inaction, but by the implementation of the orders of this honourable court,” the applicants argue.

In a supporting affidavit sworn by Joe Ager, the advisors maintain that the judgment has triggered irreversible consequences that cannot be undone even if they win on appeal.

“Once the impugned offices are abolished and consequential procedures initiated, the status quo ante cannot practically be restored, even if the intended appeal is ultimately successful, making the appeal nugatory,” they state.

The 21 advisors further argue that the court order has left them unable to undertake even basic handover procedures.

“Absent a temporary stay, the 21 advisors will be rendered incapable of lawfully reporting to duty even for purposes of transition, handover, or safeguarding of official records, and without a temporary stay, they risk immediate prejudice before the Court of Appeal reviews the matter,” the application states.

The applicants emphasize the sensitivity of their positions, noting that they perform specialized and highly sensitive advisory roles within the government, including in areas related to national security, economic policy, intergovernmental coordination, and constitutional affairs.

They warn that their sudden removal would cripple government operations.

“The abrupt removal of the Interested Parties pursuant to the impugned judgment would create an immediate operational vacuum, disrupt ongoing programmes and fracture advisory processes that have been built incrementally over time,” the application reads.

The case stems from a petition by Katiba Institute, which successfully challenged the appointment of the 21 advisors by President William Ruto, arguing that the appointments violated constitutional and statutory requirements governing public offices.

The application has been filed through Issa & Company Advocates and Garane & Somane Advocates.

The post David Ndii, 20 Other Presidential Advisors Move to Court to Stop Ruling on Their Appointments appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Presidential Advisors Archives - Insider Bits News

Blow to Ruto’s Former Advisers as High Court Rejects Return to Office for Six Months

David Ndii, 20 Other Presidential Advisors Move to Court to Stop Ruling on Their Appointments