A petition has been filed challenging ongoing walkway installation and cabro paving works in Nairobi’s Central Business District, with the applicant questioning the legality, procurement process and implementation of the public works.
Francis Awino, the petitioner, has moved to court seeking judicial review orders over the ongoing works, which he argues raise concerns relating to transparency, procedural propriety and compliance with procurement requirements.
In court filings, Awino has sought leave to apply for orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in relation to what he describes as disputed ongoing public works and related administrative action within the CBD.
The application has been filed against the Nairobi County Government and other respondents.
Awino also sought to have the matter certified as urgent, arguing that the works were ongoing and could substantially progress before the court could consider his substantive application.
“The complaint, as set out in the attached draft pleadings, is that unless the Court intervenes forthwith, the Respondents will continue to expend public funds, continue implementing the impugned works, alter public streets and potentially complete substantial portions of the works before the Court can issue effective directions,” his filings state.
The petitioner further claimed that the works have disrupted pedestrian movement in parts of the CBD, with some walkways allegedly blocked, excavated or rendered impassable.
According to the court filings, the ongoing works have also exposed members of the public to safety risks.
Awino raises concerns over what he describes as allegations of inadequate signage, barriers, warning devices and other safety measures along some of the affected stretches.
He told the court that the concerns required intervention before the works progressed further.
The applicant argued that the matter should be heard during the Judiciary’s leave period, which runs from August 1 to September 15, 2026, adding that waiting until the court resumed ordinary sittings could allow the works to progress substantially.
“The intended Judicial Review proceedings may be overtaken by events before the Court resumes its ordinary sittings,” the application adds.
“There is a real risk that by the time the matter is heard after the leave period, the substratum of the intended application may have been substantially altered or exhausted, thereby rendering the prayers for leave, stay and substantive relief nugatory.”
However, the High Court declined to certify the matter as urgent.
The directions were issued by Justice Nabil Mokaya Orina on August 3, 2026, after considering the application for urgency.
The court directed that the documents be served on the respondents.
The matter has subsequently been listed for an inter partes hearing on September 17, 2026.
