Court Battle to Block Parliament From Touching Uhuru’s Retirement Benefits

A new constitutional challenge at the Milimani Law Courts aims to block Parliament from reviewing or altering the retirement benefits of a former president. The petitioner targets specific provisions of the Presidential Retirement Benefits Act, arguing that lawmakers lack the authority to diminish these payments.

The case specifically addresses a motion introduced on May 4, 2026, by Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei targeting former President Uhuru Kenyatta’s retirement perks. The petitioner claims Cherargei’s push to review and audit these benefits is a direct violation of the law.

Sheria Mtaani and lawyer Shadrack Wambui are leading the legal battle, asking the court for conservatory orders to immediately suspend Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. They argue that pausing these sections is necessary while the court determines the final outcome of the case.

In a supporting affidavit, Wambui points out that these sections clash with Article 151(3) of the Constitution. That constitutional provision protects a former head of state by declaring that retirement benefits “shall not be varied to the disadvantage” of the holder during their lifetime.

According to court documents, the petitioner urges the court to certify the application as urgent. They are seeking interim orders to halt any debate, tabling, or consideration of the Senate motion while also calling for the suspension of the contested legal provisions.

The applicants contend that allowing Parliament to move forward would essentially grant it adjudicative powers that belong strictly to the judiciary. The petitioner argues that by attempting to determine alleged misconduct and impose punitive measures, such as withdrawing benefits, Parliament is overstepping its constitutional bounds.

“The impugned statutory framework places constitutionally protected rights at the mercy of a political process,” the petitioner argues.

The petitioner further warns that invoking these provisions risks normalizing the steady erosion of vested constitutional guarantees.

Sheria Mtaani contends that the court possesses both the authority and the obligation to intervene before any potential constitutional violation takes root. The petitioner stresses the necessity of preserving the current status quo while the legal process unfolds.

The group further argues that withholding conservatory orders could lead to irreversible harm. Specifically, they suggest that failing to act would undermine constitutional safeguards intended to protect the presidency from political retaliation after a leader leaves office.

According to the petitioner, the requested orders are narrowly defined. They maintain that these orders do not block Parliament’s wider legislative responsibilities but simply seek to pause the use of specific legal provisions while their constitutionality remains in doubt.

The post Court Battle to Block Parliament From Touching Uhuru’s Retirement Benefits appeared first on Nairobi Wire.