AfriPulse
The High Court has dismissed a bid by 21 former advisers to President William Ruto to suspend a landmark ruling that declared their offices unconstitutional.
The advisers had sought to remain in office for six months to manage a transition, but the court rejected their application, describing it as legally baseless, unfounded, and barred by the doctrine of res judicata, which prevents re-litigating matters already decided.
The former advisers argued that a temporary stay would ensure an orderly transition, protect their planned appeal, and prevent prejudice to the President. They also requested permission to return briefly to complete handover processes. Their application was supported by the Attorney General, the Public Service Commission (PSC), and the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC), all of whom sought similar stay orders against the judgment.
The court noted that the issues raised had already been fully considered and rejected shortly after the original January 22 ruling, when similar oral stay applications were denied.
“I am satisfied, and I do hereby find and hold that the application dated January 27, 2026, is indeed res judicata,” the court stated, observing that the arguments and requested relief mirrored those previously dismissed.
Among the advisers affected are David Ndii, Chairperson of the Presidential Council of Economic Advisers; Makau Mutua, Senior Adviser on Constitutional Affairs; Monica Juma, National Security Adviser; Harriet Chigai, Women’s Rights Adviser; and Edward Kisiang’ani.
Other names include Jaoko Oburu, Joseph Boinnet, Sylvester Kasuku, Nancy Laibuni, Abdi Guliye, Sylvia Kang’ara, Ali Mahat Somane, Dominic Menjo, Kennedy Ongeto, Augustine Cheruiyot, Henry Kinyua, Joe Ager, Karisa Nzai, Mohammed Hassan, Steven Otieno, and Christopher Doye Nakuleu.
Their removal follows a constitutional petition by the Katiba Institute challenging the legality of their offices. In January, the court ruled the positions unconstitutional due to role duplication, usurpation of established public offices, and the existence of lawful alternatives. The PSC had provided no evidence that it had assessed workload, duplication, or fiscal impact before approving the posts.
As part of implementing the judgment, the PSC and SRC were ordered to stop recognising the advisers’ roles and halt all related payments. The PSC was also directed to conduct a 90-day audit of all offices created under the Executive Office of the President since the 2010 Constitution.
The court upheld its ruling, stressing that res judicata protects judicial efficiency, prevents endless litigation, and ensures certainty. The judge condemned “cyclic litigation,” warning that repeatedly raising settled issues contributes to case backlogs.
“Cyclic litigation is a significant contributor to the phenomenon of backlog that bedevils our court processes. The answer to an unsatisfactory answer is not to ask the same question through another party; it is either to seek review based on the permissible grounds for the same or to appeal to the venerable court that sits above,” the judge said.
The court rejected claims that new issues could justify an exception to res judicata, noting that the advisers provided no fresh evidence of injustice. It also denied their request to return to office for six months, saying that transition arrangements had already been addressed and reinstating abolished positions would contradict the original judgment.
“If the substance of what is being sought and the grounds or arguments are identical, then the doctrine of res judicata bars that second attempt,” the judge ruled.
While denying the stay, the court ordered each party to bear its own costs, leaving the former advisers without legal grounds to resume their roles.
Separately, the court declined to hold David Ndii and Harriet Chigai in contempt over post-judgment social media comments, ruling that the remarks fell within protected free speech. However, the judge cautioned that public discussions on judicial matters must balance expression with respect for the justice system.
The ruling clears the way for full enforcement of the January judgment, with no legal basis for the advisers to return to their offices. Any further appeal must now be pursued at the Court of Appeal.
Source: NairobiWire.com | Read the Full Story…
