The High Court has ordered Nairobi County and other respondents to file their responses in a case challenging the legality of ongoing cabro paving and walkway construction across Nairobi’s Central Business District, setting the stage for a legal battle over one of the city’s most visible infrastructure projects.
Justice Dr. Nabil Mokaya Orina directed the respondents to file and serve their replies within 21 days after receiving court documents. The petitioner, activist Francis Awino, was ordered to serve the application within seven days.
The matter is scheduled for an inter partes hearing on September 17, 2026, when both sides will present their arguments before the court.
Court Declines Urgent Hearing Request
Although Awino asked the court to treat the case as urgent and hear it during the Judiciary vacation, the judge declined the request.
In directions issued on August 3, Justice Orina ruled that the application should proceed through the normal court process. The judge also ordered that Awino’s request for leave to begin judicial review proceedings, together with his application for temporary stay orders, be heard after all parties have been given an opportunity to respond.
Awino had argued that delaying the hearing could allow the projects to be completed before the court determines whether they were undertaken lawfully, potentially rendering any future orders ineffective.
Activist Challenges Legality of CBD Works
In his application, Awino seeks to halt ongoing cabro paving, walkway installation and related public works in Nairobi’s CBD.
He argues that the projects have disrupted pedestrian movement, blocked public walkways and exposed road users to unnecessary risks. He also claims the works are proceeding without following the legal and procedural requirements governing procurement and implementation.
Court documents state that the case questions “the legality, procedural propriety, transparency, procurement compliance and implementation framework” of the ongoing works in the city centre.
Awino is seeking judicial review orders, including certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay orders, to challenge the procurement processes, implementation arrangements and related administrative decisions.
Safety Concerns Raised
The petition also raises concerns about public safety around the construction sites.
According to the court filings, Awino alleges there are too few warning signs, barriers and other safety measures to protect pedestrians and motorists navigating the affected areas.
He further claims that public funds continue to be spent on projects that he believes are being implemented outside the law.
The court has not made any findings on the merits of those claims. Instead, it has directed the respondents to file their responses before the matter proceeds to a full hearing in September, when the legality of the projects will be considered.
About the Author
