A three-judge bench has declared President Ruto's Cabinet unconstitutional for violating the two-thirds gender rule, ordering a reconstitution within 120 days.
President William Ruto has suffered a major legal blow after a three-judge bench of the High Court declared that his current Cabinet violates the Constitution for failing to meet the two-thirds gender principle.
The court has now given the President 120 days (four months) to reconstitute his Cabinet to bring it into compliance with the law.
The Constitutional Violation
At the heart of the ruling is Article 27(8) of the Constitution, which requires that no more than two-thirds of members of any appointive public body be of the same gender. The judges found that despite several rounds of Cabinet appointments and reshuffles, the Executive had failed to meet this threshold.
Justice Jairus Ngaah, delivering part of the judgment, did not mince his words:
"The Cabinet, as constituted, fails the test of legality under Articles 152(1), 152(2) and Article 27(8) and is, therefore, invalid."
The bench that delivered the landmark ruling comprised Justices Eric Ogola, Jairus Ngaah, and Stephen Githinji.
Who Filed the Petition
The case was brought by a coalition of civil society and rights organisations, including:
- Katiba Institute
- Centre for Rights Education and Awareness (CREAW)
- Transparency International Kenya
- Community Advocacy and Awareness Trust (CRAWN Trust)
- World March of Women-Kenya
The petitioners specifically challenged the legality of the Cabinet constituted following the mass dismissals and subsequent appointments made after the 2024 anti-Finance Bill protests.
How the Cabinet Crisis Began
To understand this ruling, it helps to go back to July 2024, when nationwide protests against the Finance Bill 2024 forced a major political reckoning. President Ruto declined to assent to the Bill and, on July 11, 2024, dismissed almost his entire Cabinet, promising a full government reorganisation.
New Cabinet nominees were rolled out in phases between July 2024 and April 2025, with Parliament approving most of the appointments. But civil society groups maintained throughout that the reconstituted Cabinet still fell short of constitutional requirements on gender balance, inclusivity and diversity.
The Opposition Appointments Question
Beyond the gender rule, the petitioners also raised a separate — and politically sensitive — issue: the appointment of politicians from opposition parties into Cabinet positions.
They argued this move lacked a proper constitutional or statutory basis under the Political Parties Act. Justice Ngaah addressed this directly in his opinion, stating that appointing opposition party members into government outside the established legal framework was unconstitutional, arguing it undermined the constitutional principles that underpin Kenya's multi-party democracy.
However, it's worth noting that the majority judgment centred primarily on the gender rule violation — that is the specific finding that carries the binding 120-day compliance order.
What Happens Next
The ruling puts fresh pressure on President Ruto to carry out yet another Cabinet reorganisation. This time, any new appointments will need to prioritise gender compliance under Article 27(8), while the President continues balancing the political interests tied to his broad-based administration, including relationships with opposition figures already serving in government.
With the clock now running on the 120-day deadline, all eyes turn to how — and who — Ruto appoints next, and whether this reshuffle will finally satisfy the constitutional threshold that has eluded previous rounds.