Judiciary clarifies early delivery of Court of Appeal ruling on Ruto advisors

The Judiciary of Kenya has issued a clarification regarding the delivery of a ruling by the Court of Appeal that temporarily halted the implementation of a High Court judgment declaring offices of presidential advisors unconstitutional.

In a statement released on Saturday, Judiciary spokesperson Paul Ndemo said the court followed proper procedure in delivering the ruling in the case, dismissing concerns raised in public discourse about the timeline and mode of delivery.

According to the clarification, the application for stay of execution was heard by a three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal on February 23, 2026.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the bench indicated that it would deliver its ruling on April 24, 2026, or earlier upon notice.

However, after considering the matter, the judges reached a decision sooner than anticipated.

“On 12th March 2026, the Court, through the Registrar of the Court of Appeal, emailed a Notice of Delivery of Ruling to counsel for the parties. The email notification clearly indicated that the ruling on the application would be delivered on Friday, 13th March 2026 by email,” stated Ndemo.

He said the ruling was subsequently transmitted to counsel on record at 12:56pm on March 13, using the same email addresses previously used to send hearing notices and virtual participation links for the February proceedings, in which all parties took part without raising concerns about communication.

“This mode of delivery is consistent with the Judiciary’s practice, in place since 2020, of delivering rulings and judgments electronically in order to enhance efficiency and ensure timely access to court decisions by the parties involved,” Ndemo added.

The clarification comes a day after the appellate court granted the government an order staying the execution of a High Court judgment that had declared the establishment of several advisory offices in the Office of the President unconstitutional.

The High Court had ruled that the creation of advisory positions held by individuals serving in the administration of President William Ruto violated the Constitution.

The decision affected offices held by the 3rd to 23rd respondents, who serve as advisors to the President.

In its ruling on Friday, the Court of Appeal said the government had demonstrated that its intended appeal raises arguable legal issues and that failure to grant a stay could render the appeal nugatory if it ultimately succeeds.

The judges also considered the potential impact of immediately removing the advisors from office, noting that such a move could disrupt the functioning of the Office of the President and cause administrative uncertainty.

Lawyers for the government had argued that enforcing the High Court decision immediately would paralyse executive operations and create instability, particularly because formal handover processes had not taken place.

Opponents of the application, however, maintained that granting a stay would allow what they described as unconstitutional offices to continue operating despite the High Court’s findings.

While the appellate court acknowledged previous rulings in cases involving the now-defunct Chief Administrative Secretary (CAS) positions—where courts declined to suspend decisions declaring the offices unconstitutional—it said the present matter was distinguishable because the advisors were already serving when the High Court judgment was issued.

The Court of Appeal ultimately granted the stay and recommended that the President of the court prioritise the hearing of the substantive appeal due to the public interest involved.

Katiba institute, which filed the petition, said the ruling came as a shock, noting that it was scheduled to be delivered in a month and that they received no prior notice.

Costs of the application will be determined after the appeal is heard and decided.