Civil rights group sues over Nairobi County’s Sidian Bank directive for health facilities
They allege that the policy could point to irregular financial arrangements involving Sidian Bank, and want the court to intervene before public funds are affected.
A civil rights group has moved to the High Court to contest a Nairobi County directive requiring all health facilities to open and operate accounts with Sidian Bank.
In a petition filed by Bunge La Mwananchi, alongside activists Lawrence Oyugi and Komrade Bush, the group claims the directive is unconstitutional and undermines key principles of transparency and accountability in public administration.
More To Read
- City Hall cracks down on Illegal billboards, seeks Sh500 million in unpaid fees
- Petition filed to bar Nyeri Governor Mutahi Kahiga from office over alleged hate speech
- Bunge La Mwananchi, activists move to court to block Sakaja-National Government deal
- City Hall to register roadside vendors in drive to widen tax base
- Ex-Nairobi County Attorney distances Sonko from disputed JamboPay contract in court
- Nairobi County workers directed to stay home over unpaid salaries
The petitioners argue that the county's move offends several constitutional provisions — among them Articles 10, 35, 43, 201, 227, and 232 — which anchor public participation, access to information, economic and social rights, prudent use of public resources, and integrity in public service.
They have named the Nairobi City County Government, the County Executive Committee Member for Finance and Economic Planning, the acting County Secretary, and the Attorney-General as respondents in the case.
In their court papers, the activists term the matter "urgent and of great public interest," insisting that the directive has far-reaching implications for health service delivery and financial accountability in the county.
They allege that the policy could point to irregular financial arrangements involving Sidian Bank, and want the court to intervene before public funds are affected.
The petitioners are seeking declaratory and conservatory orders suspending the directive pending the hearing and determination of the case.
They further want the court to find that the county acted unlawfully by issuing the directive without engaging stakeholders or providing justification for selecting a single financial institution.
Top Stories Today
