A new petition filed at the Milimani Law Courts is seeking to stop President William Ruto from appointing additional advisors, amid growing concern over the expanding number of political appointees at State House.
The legal challenge, initiated by Nairobi-based lawyer Vincent Lempaa Suyianka, raises questions over the constitutional and fiscal legitimacy of the advisory roles created by the Kenya Kwanza administration. The petition not only aims to halt further appointments but also seeks to bar the government from paying salaries to the 21 advisors currently in office.
Suyianka contends that there is no legal or regulatory framework dictating how many advisors the President can appoint, leaving room for abuse. He argues that the unchecked appointments have led to a duplication of duties within the civil service, effectively creating a parallel government structure composed of political allies.
“Since the Kenya Kwanza government assumed office after the 2022 General Elections, the President has appointed a parallel civil service that duplicates the functions of the official civil service,” the petition states.
The petitioner claims these appointments have placed a heavy financial burden on taxpayers, citing billions spent on salaries and allowances. In his notice of motion, Suyianka calls for the immediate suspension of any payments to the 21 advisors pending the full hearing and determination of the case.
He further argues that the creation and filling of these advisory positions did not follow constitutionally mandated procedures, such as competitive recruitment or public participation. “There was a general lack of transparency in the creation of, and recruitment into, these advisory offices,” he adds.
Concerns have been mounting over the growing number of advisors under President Ruto’s administration. Despite promising to reduce the number of advisors by half, the figure has ballooned from seven to about seventeen in under a year, with more appointments reportedly made through a broad-based exchange programme.
This legal petition now places the spotlight on the presidency’s staffing practices, raising key governance and accountability questions that the courts will soon have to address.
