A group of petitioners has moved to court seeking the immediate suspension of the Privatization Act 2023, arguing that the law poses a direct threat to Kenya’s sovereignty and opens the door to unchecked disposal of key national assets. Their filing challenges both the spirit and structure of the legislation, saying it gives excessive power to the National Treasury while sidelining citizens and Parliament.
According to the petitioners, the Act grants the Treasury Cabinet Secretary sweeping authority to decide which state corporations can be sold, merged, or leased—an arrangement they describe as unconstitutional and dangerous. They say essential public entities, including strategic parastatals and national monuments, could be privatized without meaningful public participation or parliamentary oversight, undermining the public’s role as the ultimate custodian of national resources.
The petitioners warn that some of the targeted assets—such as cultural monuments, strategic infrastructure, and agencies tied to national security—should never be transferred to private hands without broad public consensus. Some even argue that their sale would require a national referendum, given their significance to Kenya’s identity and long-term stability.
Their legal challenge also draws attention to the erosion of the separation of powers. By centralizing decision-making in the executive, they argue, the Act weakens constitutional checks and balances designed to ensure that public property is managed transparently and in the national interest. They insist that Parliament’s diminished role in the privatization process violates constitutional requirements for accountability and participatory governance.
The petitioners further highlight past court rulings that align with their concerns. In earlier judgments, the High Court and the Court of Appeal flagged serious gaps in the public participation process behind the Act and questioned the legality of privatizing certain state-owned properties. These decisions reaffirmed that some national assets—especially those with cultural, historical, or strategic value—cannot be disposed of casually or without proper safeguards.
With the court now asked to suspend key provisions of the Act, including the section empowering the Treasury to list entities for privatization, the petitioners hope the judicial process will offer Kenyans a chance to rethink how public assets are managed. They want the state to adopt a more transparent, participatory approach that protects the country from losing control of resources considered vital to national identity, public welfare, and economic security.
As the case proceeds, the debate over privatization is expected to intensify, especially among citizens worried about the fate of institutions that have shaped Kenya’s history and continue to anchor its public life. The petitioners maintain that unless the law is halted, Kenya risks opening the door to irreversible decisions that could compromise its sovereignty for generations.
