Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale has rejected concerns raised by Controller of Budget Margaret Nyakang’o over the lack of direct visibility into several government funds, saying their creation under separate laws does not remove them from the country’s accountability system.
Duale said the funds mentioned by Nyakang’o are established through Acts of Parliament and have specific legal procedures governing their operations, including how money is withdrawn, managed and audited.
His response came in a statement issued on Friday night, September 18, 2026, following comments by Nyakang’o that her office does not directly see spending from a number of funds and levies operating outside the Consolidated Fund.
“Our attention has been drawn to public remarks by the Controller of Budget suggesting that certain public funds fall outside any framework of oversight and accountability. This characterisation is inaccurate and requires clarification,” Duale wrote on X.
The Health CS referred to Article 228 of the Constitution and the Controller of Budget Act, 2016, saying they clearly define the responsibilities of the Controller of Budget.
He said the office is responsible for authorising withdrawals from the Equalisation Fund, the Consolidated Fund and County Revenue Funds.
Duale added that Parliament can also, through legislation, place other public funds under the Controller of Budget’s approval.
He pointed to Article 228(5), which requires the Controller of Budget to determine whether a proposed withdrawal has been authorised by law before approving it.
“The mandate of the Office of the Controller of Budget is defined by Article 228 of the Constitution and the Controller of Budget Act, 2016,” he said.
According to Duale, the fact that some funds are created under separate legislation does not place them outside public scrutiny.
He said each of the funds referred to in Nyakang’o’s interview has its own legal framework that sets out how the money is handled, withdrawn and audited.
“The funds referred to in the interview were established by their own legislation, each with defined mechanisms for management, withdrawal and audit,” he said.
Duale added that the funds remain subject to oversight by the country’s two key accountability institutions.
“They remain fully subject to the oversight of the Auditor-General and Parliament.”
The CS said describing the funds as beyond oversight would give an incorrect picture of the legal arrangements governing public finances.
Duale also sought to separate his criticism of Nyakang’o’s remarks from the constitutional independence of her office.
He said the government respects the Controller of Budget as an independent constitutional institution.
At the same time, he argued that the office’s independence should be exercised within the powers and procedures set out by the Constitution and other relevant laws.
“The Controller of Budget is an independent constitutional office, and Government respects that independence,” he said.
He said the office has established channels through which it carries out its mandate, including reporting to Parliament and approving withdrawals that are legally authorised.
“Independence, however, is exercised through the constitutional and statutory instruments provided — reports to Parliament and lawful approval of withdrawals — not through public commentary that mischaracterises the legal framework.”
The dispute followed comments made by Nyakang’o during an interview with a local television station on September 17, 2026.
The Controller of Budget said her office lacks direct visibility into several government funds and levies that operate outside the Consolidated Fund.
Among the funds she cited were the Social Health Insurance Fund (SHIF), National Infrastructure Fund (NIF), Sovereign Wealth Fund and Primary Healthcare Fund.
Nyakang’o explained that the funds are created under separate legal frameworks and that her office cannot directly trace how money is spent from them after it reaches implementing agencies.
“Anything called a fund or a levy, we will not see it,” Nyakang’o said.
She said many of the funds are transferred to implementing agencies in lump sums, limiting her office’s ability to follow the subsequent use of the money.
Nyakang’o maintained that her office continues to exercise its constitutional role over withdrawals from the Consolidated Fund.
However, she said the growing number of statutory funds had raised questions about the extent of oversight and created gaps that should be addressed through public debate.
She also questioned whether the country had moved away from some of the financial safeguards provided for under the 2010 Constitution.
Nyakang’o called for stronger reporting systems that would allow Parliament and other oversight institutions to examine the management and expenditure of money held in such funds.