Petitioners Move to Court to Block Ruto's Proposed National Infrastructure Fund

Four Kenyan citizens have filed a petition in the High Court seeking to stop the establishment of the proposed National Infrastructure Fund.

They argue that it was created unlawfully through an executive directive rather than an Act of Parliament. The petition, filed in the Constitutional and Human Rights Division in Nairobi, challenges the decision by President William Ruto’s administration to set up the fund following a State House communiqué issued on 15 December 2025.  

The announcement described the fund as a limited liability company intended to serve as the main vehicle for mobilising and coordinating financing for a Sh5 trillion national infrastructure programme. The petitioners argue that the fund constitutes a national public fund and therefore falls under Article 206 of the Constitution, which provides that such funds may only be established by the Constitution or through legislation. 

They contend that the executive exceeded its authority by attempting to create the fund under the Companies Act without parliamentary approval. The case is led by Nakuru-based consultant surgeon Dr Benjamin Magare-Gikenyi, together with three other petitioners. They accuse the government of violating constitutional principles of openness, accountability, and responsible management of public resources. 

Citing Article 201, they argue that the fund was introduced without public participation or adequate safeguards to ensure prudent use of public money.

The petition also raises concerns about the potential impact of the fund on Kenya’s existing fiscal framework. 

The petitioners warn that it could duplicate or undermine the role of the Equalisation Fund, which is established under Article 204 of the Constitution to support marginalised areas. They argue that the proposed fund could weaken constitutional protections aimed at promoting equitable development.

Parliament is criticised in the petition for failing to exercise its oversight role. The petitioners accuse both the National Assembly and the Senate of allowing the executive to proceed unchecked in establishing what they describe as an ad hoc public fund outside the formal budgetary process, thereby reducing parliamentary control over public finances.

Further issues are raised about the fund’s legal and operational structure. The government has not specified whether the company would be limited by shares or by guarantee, which the petitioners say undermines the constitutional requirement for accurate and transparent public information. 

They also question references in the State House communiqué to the “strategic monetisation of mature public assets”, warning that this could involve the disposal of public property outside established legal and financial controls.

The petitioners are seeking conservatory orders to suspend any steps taken to implement the fund pending the determination of the case. They are also asking the court to declare the actions of the President and other respondents unconstitutional and to invalidate the establishment of the fund. 

Those named as respondents include the Attorney General, the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury, Parliament, and the Controller of Budget. The Law Society of Kenya and Katiba Institute have been listed as interested parties.