 |
| Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi |
Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi is facing renewed pressure after a Nakuru-based medical specialist, Dr Magare Gikenyi Benjamin, moved to court asking that he be held in contempt for failing to enforce an order that stopped the collection of the fifty-shilling charge on the eCitizen platform.
Dr Magare, a consultant surgeon, filed the application after noting that the fee was still being levied despite a ruling from the Court of Appeal that reaffirmed the earlier suspension.
In an affidavit dated 21 November 2025, Dr Magare said the National Treasury had gone against clear directions issued by the courts.
He explained that a three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal, made up of Justice Daniel Musinga, Justice Francis Tuiyott, and Lady Justice Pauline Nyamweya, had dismissed a government plea to suspend the High Court judgment delivered on 1 April 2025.
The April judgment had found the fifty-shilling convenience fee unconstitutional and ordered that the charges be halted.
According to Dr Magare’s affidavit, the decision by the appellate court removed any remaining basis for the continued deduction of the fee.
He argued that the ruling confirmed that the government had no lawful authority to keep imposing the charge under any description, whether labelled as a convenience, transaction, or access fee.
Dr Magare further accused the Treasury of acting in disregard of the law, pointing to a replying affidavit sworn on 4 November 2025 by CS Mbadi.
In that document, the Cabinet Secretary is said to have acknowledged that the Treasury had not complied with the earlier orders. The doctor said this amounted to open defiance and asked the court to declare the Treasury CS, the National Treasury, and the Attorney General in contempt.
He added that respect for court decisions was essential for constitutional order and argued that public officers have a duty to lead by example.
He noted that citizens were expected to follow the law and that state officials should not be treated differently or placed above judicial scrutiny.
The dispute has drawn interest from several national institutions and advocacy groups.
Among those observing or supporting the case are the Council of Governors, the Kenya Secondary School Heads Association, the Kenya Primary School Heads Association, the Kenya Parents Association, the Consumer Federation of Kenya, the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers, the Law Society of Kenya, Operation Linda Jamii, and the Office of the Auditor General. Their participation signals the wide effect of the contested fee, especially for service delivery in counties and learning institutions.
On the same day the Court of Appeal issued its ruling, the High Court also delivered a separate judgment.
Justice Chacha Mwita declared that the convenience fee and the directive requiring parents to pay school fees through eCitizen had no valid legal foundation. He found that both measures were introduced without the statutory framework needed to support mandatory charges on public services.
The decision strengthened the earlier orders and placed further pressure on the Treasury to stop collecting the fee while the matter proceeds through the courts.
