High court suspends President Ruto's executive order placing IPOA under Interior Ministry

The High Court has temporarily suspended the implementation of president William Ruto's Executive Order No. 2 of 2023 that placed the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) under the Ministry of Interior and National Administration, pending the hearing and determination of a constitutional petition challenging the directive.

Justice David Mburu of the High Court in Milimani law court issued the conservatory orders in a case filed by Jonathan Obwogi under Maalim and associates advocates against the Attorney General, the Cabinet Secretary for Interior and National Administration, and the Independent Policing Oversight Authority.

The court ruled that the contested section of the Executive Order would remain suspended until the constitutional petition is fully heard and determined.

The decision does not amount to a final declaration on the legality of the Executive Order. Instead, the court restored the legal position that existed before the order was issued to safeguard the constitutional issues raised in the petition from further prejudice.

Under Section 4 of the IPOA Act, the authority is required to operate independently and is not subject to the direction or control of any person, office or institution in the performance of its functions. The law further requires all government agencies to assist and protect IPOA's independence, prohibits interference with its decision making and operations, and obligates Parliament to ensure it receives adequate funding.

The conservatory orders mean that the Ministry of Interior cannot, for now, supervise, administer, direct or exercise authority over IPOA based on Executive Order No. 2 of 2023.

The court's decision, however, does not affect IPOA's day-to-day operations. The authority will continue carrying out its statutory mandate, including investigating complaints against police officers, probing deaths and serious injuries arising from police action, and undertaking all responsibilities assigned to it under the IPOA Act.

In the petition, the applicant also sought to compel IPOA's Chairperson, or another authorised officer, to disclose through an affidavit whether the authority had implemented the Executive Order, the extent to which it had operated under the Ministry of Interior, and any operational changes that may have resulted. The petitioner argued that such information would help establish whether the authority's statutory independence had been compromised.

The High Court observed that the question of whether Executive Order No. 2 of 2023 is constitutional will only be determined after hearing submissions from all parties.

The matter is scheduled for a mention on September 21, 2026, when the court is expected to issue further directions.