Court halts public participation on draft private security regulations
Lady Justice Roselyn Aburili certified the case filed by Security Academy, an ex parte applicant, as urgent and allowed the guard to commence judicial review proceedings.
The High Court has stopped the government from proceeding with planned public participation forums on a set of draft regulations governing the private security sector, after a security guard challenged the short notice issued for the consultative meetings.
In a ruling delivered on Thursday, Lady Justice Roselyn Aburili certified the case filed by Security Academy, an ex parte applicant, as urgent and allowed the guard to commence judicial review proceedings.
More To Read
- Private security guards demand government action over abuse, neglect by employers
- New digital platform connects private security guards directly with clients
- Employers must pay security guards at least Sh30,000, court rules after dismissing petition
- President Ruto reappoints Nyange as PSRA Chair as CSs restructure key ministries
- Regulator pleads for state intervention as G4S plans to sack 400 workers
- Dangerous job without weapons: Security guards' struggles as anti-state demos turn violent
The challenge targets a public notice issued on November 18, 2025, by the Ministry of Interior and the Private Security Regulatory Authority (PSRA), announcing public participation forums scheduled for November 21 and 24 across several counties.
The applicant argued that the two-day notice was unreasonably short and violated constitutional requirements for meaningful public participation.
He claimed that many stakeholders in the private security sector, comprising thousands of guards, trainers, employers, and unions, would be denied an adequate opportunity to engage with the draft regulations.
"I am satisfied that the application is urgent," Justice Aburili said in her ruling. "If this Court declines the stay sought, these proceedings will be rendered nugatory should the substantive motion succeed, since the process which is impugned would have been completed."
Without delving into the merits of the intended judicial review, the judge found that the application raised "an arguable case" that was neither frivolous nor hopeless. She therefore granted the applicant leave to proceed with the judicial review motion challenging the notice and the conduct of the public participation exercise.
The judge further ordered that the leave granted shall operate as a stay of the implementation of the 18 November notice.
The effect of the order is that the Interior Ministry, PSRA, the National Assembly, the National Treasury, and the Attorney General, who are listed as respondents, cannot proceed with the scheduled forums in Garissa, Machakos, Kisumu, Kakamega, Mombasa, Nyeri, and Nairobi until the case is heard and determined.
The Kenya National Private Security Workers Union and the Law Society of Kenya are named as interested parties in the dispute.
The applicant is seeking, among other orders, the quashing of the impugned notice, a declaration that the notice violated Articles 10 and 27 of the Constitution, and an order barring the respondents from issuing or conducting further public participation on the draft regulations without proper compliance with constitutional standards.
Justice Aburili directed that the substantive motion be filed and served within five days in a fresh file. After issuing the stay and procedural directions, the court marked the miscellaneous file as closed.
The disputed regulations include the Draft Private Security (General) Regulations 2025, the Draft Regulations on Appointment of Board Members, and the Draft Regulations on Use of Animals in Private Security Services.
Top Stories Today
