The High Court has declined to issue interim orders in a petition seeking to bar political parties from holding meetings and activities at State House, instead directing that the matter be heard and determined on its merits.
The case was filed by lawyer Lempaa Suyianka against the Attorney General, the Controller of State House, the United Democratic Alliance (UDA), and President William Ruto.
The petitioner said that State House and State Lodges have in recent months been used for activities he describes as partisan political, which he says may be inconsistent with the Constitution and public finance laws.
In the petition, Suyianka lists several meetings reportedly held at State House involving political leaders and party officials.
These include engagements with leaders from Gusii, Kiambu, Ukambani, Murang’a, Narok, and Western Kenya, as well as a meeting of UDA’s National Governing Council chaired by President Ruto on January 26, 2026.
He also refers to an inaugural UDA aspirants’ forum held at State House on February 4, 2026, which is said to have brought together thousands of party aspirants, officials, and supporters.
The petitioner claims the meetings were not State functions or administrative government engagements, but political party activities conducted using public resources.
He stated that State House facilities, security, staff, logistics, and media infrastructure were reportedly deployed for party activities, which, he said, may have blurred the constitutional line between the State and political parties.
"Executive authority is exercised in trust for the people of Kenya and must remain institutionally and financially distinct from partisan political activity," the petition states."While the President retains political rights, he may not appropriate State institutions, public resources, or symbols of national unity for party political purposes," it adds.According to the petition, there has been no public disclosure showing that UDA reimbursed the State for the costs incurred, nor is there information demonstrating compliance with Articles 201 and 226 of the Constitution or the Public Finance Management Act.
The petitioner seeks declarations that State House and State Lodges are reserved exclusively for State functions and that their use for partisan activities is unconstitutional.
