The Katiba Institute has written to the Office of the Controller of Budget, pressing for full enforcement of a High Court ruling that struck down the creation and staffing of offices for Presidential Advisers, escalating scrutiny of how public money is being spent.
In a letter dated February 4, 2026 and addressed to Controller of Budget Margaret Nyakang’o, Katiba Institute asked for written assurance that no funds have been approved for the former advisers or their offices since January 22, the day the court invalidated the positions. Katiba’s executive director Nora Mbagaithi said the request was grounded in Article 228 of the Constitution, which bars the authorisation of unlawful expenditure.
The move effectively takes the dispute out of the courtroom and into Kenya’s public finance oversight machinery, putting the Controller of Budget under the spotlight over whether payments may have continued despite the court order.
The Controller of Budget is constitutionally mandated to authorise withdrawals from public funds and ensure all spending complies with the law. Katiba’s intervention follows a separate High Court decision that dismissed an attempt by 21 former advisers to suspend the January ruling. The court declined to grant a stay of execution, clearing the way for the judgment to be implemented in full.
Those affected include David Ndii, Makau Mutua, Monica Juma, Harriet Chigai and Edward Kisiang’ani, all of whom served the President in advisory capacities. In its January judgment, the court held that the offices had no clear legal foundation and duplicated roles already entrenched within the public service.
Katiba noted that the court found the advisers’ appointments were made without constitutional or statutory authority, sidestepping the roles of the Public Service Commission and the Salaries and Remuneration Commission.
Also Read: Survey: Kenyans Spend Under Sh2,000 a Month on Wellness
Judges also raised red flags over public finance management, pointing to the “significant budgetary implications” of the offices in the absence of proper legal and institutional checks. As part of the ruling, the PSC and SRC were ordered to stop recognising the posts and halt all related payments. The PSC was further directed to carry out a 90-day audit of offices created under the Executive Office of the President since the 2010 Constitution came into force.
The advisers, listed as interested parties in the case, quickly returned to court seeking a stay, arguing that a temporary reprieve would allow for an orderly transition, safeguard their intended appeal and avoid prejudice to the President. The Attorney General, PSC and SRC backed the application.
The court was unconvinced. It dismissed the request on the grounds of res judicata, ruling that the matter had already been conclusively decided. The judge warned against what he termed “cyclic litigation”, cautioning that repeatedly reopening settled questions clogs the courts and erodes legal certainty.
