A legal challenge seeking accountability over millions of shillings allegedly handed out by senior government officials has put Deputy President Kithure Kindiki, several Cabinet-level figures and lawmakers at the centre of a dispute over the use and distribution of money and other valuables.
The petition, filed by Kelvin Kipchirchir, wants the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) to investigate the officials and establish how they obtained the resources they allegedly distributed during public functions and whether the exercise complied with laws governing public service.
Kipchirchir claims that Kindiki gave out more than Sh1 billion in cash and other items, while Kapsaret MP Oscar Sudi allegedly distributed money and goods valued at Sh145 million.
He has also questioned donations reportedly made by the Deputy President during gatherings in Taita Taveta and Kilifi counties in July 2025, which he estimates at Sh4.5 million.
In the case lodged on July 31, 2025, the petitioner argues that the distributions were not undertaken through recognised government initiatives and had no approved budgetary provisions.
He wants the court to determine whether the officials had the legal authority to make the handouts and whether the money and property were distributed in compliance with public finance requirements.
Several top officials listed as respondents
The case also names Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi, National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang'ula and Majority Leader Kimani Ichung'wah.
Other political figures listed in the petition include Farouk Kibet, an aide to President William Ruto, MPs Didmus Barasa and Silvanus Osoro, and Kericho Senator Aaron Cheruiyot.
The Attorney-General, EACC and Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi have also been included as respondents.
Kipchirchir contends that the alleged activities violated constitutional requirements on integrity and accountability, as well as provisions of the Public Officer Ethics Act, 2003, the Leadership and Integrity Act, 2012, and the Bribery Act, 2016.
He maintains that the distributions were never gazetted as government programmes and that there were no publicly accessible records showing that funds had been approved for the exercise.
The petitioner has also drawn attention to the political nature of some of the events, claiming that money and other items were given out at political gatherings and public functions.
He argues that distributing valuables in such settings could sway public opinion and affect the decisions voters make, and wants the court to determine whether the conduct constituted bribery under the law.
Petitioner wants restrictions on future handouts
Kipchirchir is seeking court declarations that the alleged distributions were unconstitutional and amounted to abuse of public office.
He also wants permanent orders preventing the named officials from handing out cash, vehicles, motorbikes, sewing machines and other assets unless the distributions are conducted under duly authorised government programmes.
Another key request is for EACC to be compelled to trace the origins of the money and property involved in the alleged handouts.
The commission would also be expected to investigate whether public resources were used to facilitate the activities, including the deployment of government vehicles, security personnel and other State facilities.
The petitioner has separately sought orders directing Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi to establish guidelines governing the distribution of money and assets by State officials.
Under the proposed requirements, every distribution would have to be supported by an approved budget, receive the necessary authorisation and be properly accounted for in accordance with the Public Finance Management Act.
He argues that having such guidelines would ensure that distributions involving State officers are subjected to proper financial controls rather than being undertaken without clear records of their funding and approval.
Court gives January 2027 date
The petition was scheduled for oral arguments before Justice Roselyne Aburili on Wednesday, November 4, but the proceedings were postponed after Kipchirchir failed to attend court.
Government and National Assembly lawyers asked for the matter to be adjourned following the petitioner's absence.
Justice Aburili noted that although Kipchirchir was not present, the parties had already filed their written submissions, which remained on record.
"The petitioner is absent, but submissions are on record," the judge said, adding that the court would not dismiss a matter in which parties had already filed their submissions.
The judge subsequently directed the court registry to notify Kipchirchir of the next mention, set for January 19, 2027.
The court will use the scheduled appearance to determine when the judgment in the matter will be delivered.