The High Court in Nairobi on April 2, 2025, ruled President William Ruto’s 2023 National Climate Change Council appointments unconstitutional due to insufficient public participation and lack of transparency.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi nullified the appointments of Emily Mwende Waita, John Kioli, Umar Omar, and George Odera Outa, ordering fresh nominations within 90 days in compliance with constitutional requirements.
The court found that the selection process violated principles of good governance, accountability, and competitive recruitment mandated by the Climate Change Act of 2016.
Court Upholds Need for Public Participation
Justice Mugambi emphasised the absence of evidence demonstrating stakeholder engagement or public involvement, noting a lack of clarity on which nominee represented the largest civil society organisation working on climate change, as required by the Act.
“There was no evidence of stakeholder engagement, and the respondents failed to demonstrate how public involvement was conducted, as required by law,” the judge stated.
The ruling stemmed from a petition by the Mt. Kenya Network Forum and the Indigenous Peoples National Steering Committee on Climate Change, who argued that the appointments were opaque, favoured political allies, and excluded civil society organisations.
The petitioners highlighted the failure to adhere to legal standards for transparency and public participation, as outlined in the Public Participation Act.
The National Climate Change Council, established under the 2016 Act, coordinates Kenya’s climate change efforts, implements the National Climate Change Action Plan, manages climate funds, regulates greenhouse gas emissions, and advises on climate-related policies.
This ruling undermines President Ruto’s environmental reform agenda, including his ambitious goal of planting 15 billion trees by 2032, as Kenya strives to meet carbon emission reduction and renewable energy targets.
Climate Change Act Breached in Nominee Selection
The court’s decision follows a February 2023 interim order by Justice Mugure Thande, which suspended the appointees from assuming office pending the petition’s resolution.
The nominees argued that the Climate Change Act does not specify procedures for selecting representatives from marginalised communities, but the court upheld the petitioners’ claims, reinforcing the need for transparent and inclusive processes.
“It is not clear who among the nominees is a representative of the largest civil society organisation working on climate change, as it is required by the Council Act,” the petitioners told the court.
“It is also not clear whether there was any form of public participation in the selection of the said individuals in accordance with the Public Participation Act.”
