Court orders Nairobi County to file response in case challenging cabro paving

Justice Dr. Nabil Mokaya Orina directed the respondents to file and serve their responses to the application within 21 days after being served.

The court further directed activist Francis Awino to serve the respondents with the application within seven days.

The matter has been scheduled for an inter partes hearing on September 17, 2026.

In the directions issued on August 3, the court declined to certify the matter as urgent and ordered that Awino's application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings, together with his request for stay orders, be heard inter partes.

Awino moved to the High Court seeking to halt the ongoing public works and procurement processes in Nairobi's CBD, arguing that the projects are being implemented unlawfully and without compliance with the required legal procedures.

In his judicial review application, he contends that the works have disrupted pedestrian movement, blocked walkways, exposed road users to danger and are being carried out under what he describes as a procedurally defective framework.

He further alleges that public funds continue to be spent on the projects in an unlawful and unprocedural manner.

"The said judicial review application challenges the legality, procedural propriety, transparency, procurement compliance and implementation framework of the ongoing cabro paving, walkway installation and related public works being undertaken within Nairobi Central Business District," the court papers state.

Awino is seeking judicial review orders of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay to challenge the works, procurement processes, implementation arrangements and related administrative decisions.

He had also asked the court to certify the matter as urgent and allow it to be heard during the Judiciary vacation, arguing that if the case was not heard during the recess, the projects could be completed before the courts resumed, rendering the proceedings and any relief granted ineffective.

The activist further claims that there is a lack of, or an insufficient number of, signage, barriers, warning devices, and other public safety measures at the affected sites, posing a risk to pedestrians and motorists.

However, the court declined to certify the matter as urgent and instead directed that the application proceed through the normal inter partes hearing process on September 17, 2026.