A fresh legal battle is now unfolding over the government’s affordable housing plan after a petition was lodged in court by the Kenya Human Rights Commission and several other civic groups.
The matter has drawn attention because it questions the very foundation of one of President William Ruto’s flagship projects.
The petition, filed at the High Court on Friday, directly challenges the affordable housing levy, which was introduced as part of the housing programme.
The petitioners argue that the levy, instead of helping Kenyans, has worsened the economic situation for many families.
They claim that many citizens have been pushed further into poverty by this deduction, which takes 1.5 percent from employees’ gross salaries and demands an equal contribution from employers.
According to them, the levy is being used as a political instrument to gain voter support rather than to address the serious problem of housing in the country.
The coalition behind the case includes the Kenya Human Rights Commission, Transparency International Kenya, Institute for Social Accountability, Inuka Kenya Ni Sisi, and Siasa Place.
These organisations state that the levy is not only burdensome but also unlawful, unconstitutional, and socially harmful.
They argue that it unfairly targets salaried employees, who already face numerous deductions such as tax, pension, and health contributions.
For many workers, this additional deduction has become a heavy strain on their monthly income.
Court documents show that the petitioners are questioning whether the levy has actually delivered on its intended goals.
They argue that despite being in place, it has failed to advance the right to housing as promised in the constitution.
Instead, they claim that more than 20 million Kenyans working in the informal sector, who are not directly covered by the levy, remain excluded from the programme.
This raises concerns about inequality and fairness in the implementation of the housing plan.
The petition further highlights specific sections of the Affordable Housing Act.
The groups want Sections 3, 4, 5, and 12 declared unconstitutional, null, and void. These sections establish the legal framework for the levy and direct funds into the National Housing Development Fund.
According to the petitioners, this structure violates constitutional principles because it promotes economic regression, politicises public money, and lacks transparency and accountability.
They also argue that the administration of the levy has been unfair and discriminatory, as it benefits certain groups at the expense of others.
The Kenya Human Rights Commission and its partners are seeking to stop what they see as an unfair financial burden on ordinary Kenyans.
The outcome of this case could have far-reaching effects on the government’s affordable housing programme, which has been presented as a solution to the country’s housing deficit but is now facing one of its biggest legal and social challenges.
Leave feedback about this