A constitutional petition has been filed at the High Court seeking to halt the implementation of Nairobi's revised water tariffs introduced through Gazette Notice No. 2710, setting the stage for a legal battle over the legality of the new charges and the process used to approve them.


The petitioner, Francis Awino, is asking the court to issue conservatory orders suspending the enforcement, billing, collection, and implementation of the revised tariffs pending the hearing and determination of the case. He argues that the tariff review process failed to meet constitutional and statutory requirements, particularly on public participation and access to information.


According to court documents, the petition challenges the legality of the tariff adjustments on grounds that consumers were not adequately consulted before the new rates were approved. Awino contends that the review process violated constitutional provisions on public participation, fair administrative action, and consumer rights.


As an alternative remedy, the petitioner wants the court to order that all payments collected under the disputed tariff structure be ring-fenced pending the outcome of the case. Should the court ultimately find the tariff review unlawful, consumers would be entitled to adjustments, credits, or refunds for any excess charges incurred under the new rates.


The petition further seeks protection for Nairobi residents against disconnections, penalties, reconnection fees, and back-billing arising from non-payment of the contested tariff increment while the matter remains before the court.


In addition, the petitioner is seeking orders compelling the relevant authorities to disclose documents used in approving the tariff review, including affordability studies, technical and financial reports, stakeholder submissions, public participation records, attendance registers, minutes of meetings, and any objections received during the review process.


The case raises questions about compliance with Section 139 of the Water Act, which requires public participation before major tariff changes are implemented. While water authorities reportedly conducted a stakeholder engagement forum in December 2025, the petitioner argues that there is insufficient evidence demonstrating meaningful public involvement or showing how public views influenced the final decision.


The outcome of the petition could have far-reaching implications for utility pricing and public participation in Kenya, particularly at a time when many households are grappling with the rising cost of living. Consumers, water service providers, and policymakers are now awaiting the court's determination on whether the revised tariffs will remain in force or be suspended pending a full hearing of the constitutional challenge.