IMF struck out of Kenya's Sh7 trillion 'Odious debt' case, granted immunity

 IMF sought to be removed from the proceedings on grounds that it is protected by international treaties and Kenyan law. [Courtesy]

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has secured a major legal victory after a three-judge bench of the High Court struck it out of a landmark petition challenging the legality of Kenya’s Sh7 trillion public debt, ruling that the global lender enjoys immunity from legal proceedings in Kenyan courts.

In a ruling rendered on June 25,2026, the bench comprising Justices Francis Gikonyo, Moses Ado and Roselyne Aburili allowed an application filed by the IMF seeking to be removed from the proceedings on grounds that it is protected by international treaties and Kenyan law.

In its ruling, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain proceedings against the IMF because the institution had not waived the immunity granted to it under the Bretton Woods Agreement Act and the IMF Articles of Agreement.

“This court is satisfied that it has no jurisdiction to entertain proceedings against the IMF, as the latter is entitled to immunity from all legal processes which immunity it has not waived,” the judges ruled.

The court rejected arguments by petitioners led by Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah that the IMF should remain a party because of its alleged role in Kenya’s borrowing framework and the debt dispute before the court.

Omtatah and his co-petitioners had argued that the IMF was an indispensable party, citing its alleged role in shaping Kenya's borrowing framework and an "on-lent loan" of Sh50 billion with no basis in Kenyan statute. 

The petition, which also challenges Eurobond loans totaling USD 7.1 billion, now proceeds to a full hearing without the Fund as a respondent.  

The judges held that questions regarding the constitutionality of treaties and statutes granting immunity to international organisations can only be determined through a substantive constitutional petition and not through an interlocutory application opposing the striking out of a party.

“Without a formal constitutional petition challenging the statute or treaty, we find that an application to strike out a respondent is a procedural application whose main purpose is to determine whether the claim against it is legally tenable,” the bench stated.

The court further noted that the IMF’s immunity is recognised under international law and has been domesticated in Kenya through legislation and constitutional provisions.

“We further find that the IMF has not waived its immunity in these proceedings,” the judges said.

Emphasising Kenya’s obligations under international treaties, the bench stated that courts are bound to recognise and enforce immunities conferred on international organisations unless a waiver has been expressly demonstrated.

“For all the above reasons, we allow the notice of motion dated March 17, 2026 and order that the International Monetary Fund, IMF, which is the 22nd respondent herein, is struck out of these proceedings,” the court ruled.

Each party was ordered to bear its own costs of the application.