The High Court of Kenya has declared President William Ruto's plan to allocate affordable houses to teachers and police officers as legally ineffective. This decision was made on October 29, 2026, by Justice Patricia Nyaundi Mande. The ruling stated that the President cannot introduce preferential housing allocation criteria through executive pronouncements that are not supported by legislation or an established policy framework.
The court's decision was based on a constitutional petition filed by John Maina Ndegwa and Marshalls Tito Ongoya. They challenged the President's proposals to reserve 20 per cent of affordable housing units for teachers and another 20 per cent for members of the National Police Service. The petitioners argued that these quotas would unfairly favour selected professional groups in a programme funded through housing levies, taxpayer money, and other public resources.
The petitioners contended that the constitutional right to housing applies equally to all citizens and that preferential treatment for specific occupational groups must have a lawful justification. They also argued that the proposed allocations violated constitutional principles of equality, transparency, public participation, and accountability in the management of public resources. The petitioners asked the court to declare the presidential directives unconstitutional and prohibit their implementation.
The respondents, however, opposed the petition, maintaining that the President was exercising his constitutional authority under Article 132(3)(b) to direct and coordinate the functions of ministries and government departments. They argued that the presidential pronouncements did not amend the Affordable Housing Act or override the statutory mandate of the Affordable Housing Board.
Justice Nyaundi rejected the respondents' argument, finding that the petition raised a legitimate constitutional question even though the proposed preferences had not been implemented. The judge held that presidential powers must be exercised within the Constitution and cannot be used to introduce allocation criteria that Parliament has not provided for in law.
The judge further warned against allowing executive announcements to override legislation enacted under the Constitution. She stated that executive authority may facilitate the implementation of the law, but it cannot alter the law or create rights and preferences outside it. The Affordable Housing Act and its Regulations already establish the legal framework governing the allocation of housing units.
The court's decision means the President's announcements cannot independently provide a lawful basis for reserving the proposed housing quotas for teachers and police officers. However, the court ruling does not invalidate the entire Affordable Housing Programme. Justice Nyaundi made no order as to costs, noting that the petition had been brought in the public interest.
Key points
- The High Court of Kenya has ruled President William Ruto's plan to allocate affordable houses to teachers and police officers as legally ineffective.
- The court's decision was based on a constitutional petition challenging the President's proposals to reserve 20 per cent of affordable housing units for teachers and another 20 per cent for members of the National Police Service.
- The ruling stated that the President cannot introduce preferential housing allocation criteria through executive pronouncements that are not supported by legislation or an established policy framework.
