Nairobi's newly introduced water tariffs are facing a fresh legal challenge after a petitioner moved to the High Court seeking to stop their implementation, arguing that the process leading to the approval of the revised charges fell short of constitutional and legal requirements on public participation.
The petition, filed by Francis Awino, asks the court to suspend the enforcement, billing, collection and implementation of the revised tariffs introduced through Gazette Notice No. 2710 until the constitutional case is heard and determined.
If the court declines to halt the implementation, Awino wants all bills issued under the contested tariff placed in a separate account and subjected to adjustment, credit or refund should the petition ultimately succeed.
He is also seeking orders protecting consumers from water disconnections, penalties, back-billing and reconnection charges arising from failure to pay the disputed tariff increase while the case is pending.
The petitioner further wants the respondents compelled to release all documents relied upon in approving the new tariffs. These include the tariff application, affordability studies, financial and technical reports, records of public participation, stakeholder invitations, attendance registers, minutes, objections received and any other material used during the approval process.
Awino is equally asking the court to direct the respondents to file a full record of the public participation exercise conducted under Section 139 of the Water Act. He wants the record to include notices issued before the exercise, venues where meetings were held, stakeholders who attended, written submissions received and an explanation of how the views collected from the public were considered before the revised tariffs were approved.
According to the petition, the case raises constitutional questions on the right to water, consumer protection, access to information, public participation and fair administrative action.
Court documents state that although the revised tariff introduces higher charges for domestic, commercial, institutional, sewerage and other consumer categories over a four-year period, there is no clear evidence showing that the legal requirements on public participation were fully met.
The petitioner argues that while Nairobi City Water and Sewerage Company stated that a stakeholder forum was held on December 19, 2025, there are no attendance records, details of stakeholder representation, written objections or evidence showing how public views influenced the final decision.
The petition also questions the decision to increase tariffs while service delivery challenges persist. It notes that the utility has water coverage of 79 per cent, sewerage coverage of 52 per cent, non-revenue water standing at 54 per cent and an average daily water supply of only nine hours.
Despite the application, the High Court declined to certify the matter as urgent.
Justice Patricia Nyaundi Mande directed the petitioner to serve the respondents with the petition and application within seven days, by July 13, 2026.
The respondents have been given 14 days after service to file their responses, while the petitioner was granted leave to file a further affidavit by August 6, 2026.
The matter will be mentioned on October 27, 2026, for further directions.