Uhuru Wins as Court Strikes Down Law Restricting Retired Presidents from Politics

The High Court has declared unconstitutional a law restricting retired presidents from holding political party office, ruling that leaving the presidency does not take away a former head of state’s constitutional political rights.

In a ruling dated September 21, Justice Bahati Mwamuye ruled that Section 6 of the Presidential Retirement Benefits Act, which restricts retired presidents from holding office in a political party beyond six months after leaving State House, is unconstitutional, null and void.

The court held that a former president remains a private citizen after leaving office and cannot be subjected to restrictions on their political life simply because they previously held the presidency.

Court Rules That Retired Presidents Should Retain Political Rights

Justice Mwamuye noted that once a president leaves office, they cease to exercise the coercive and executive authority of the State.

The judge held that continued political influence by a former president does not amount to the exercise of executive authority.

Therefore, the court found that restricting a retired president from holding political party office interfered with political rights protected under Article 38 of the Constitution.

Additionally, the High Court addressed the link between political activity and retirement benefits.

Also Read: Uhuru Breaks Silence After Court Bars Him from Being Jubilee Party Leader

According to Justice Mwamuye, making a former president’s pension dependent on political inactivity could effectively impose an economic penalty on the exercise of constitutional political rights.

The court held that a former president cannot be forced to choose between exercising political rights and retaining constitutionally protected retirement benefits.

As a result , the judge declared the entirety of Section 6 of the Presidential Retirement Benefits Act unconstitutional, alongside Sections 4(1), 4(2) and 4(3) of the Act.

This means that State organs cannot enforce Section 6 to prevent a retired president from holding political party office, while Section 4(4), which concerns benefits payable to a surviving spouse, remains intact.

Case Challenged Restrictions on Former President

The case was filed by civic advocacy group Sheria Mtaani and activist Shadrack Wambui against the Senate, National Assembly and the Attorney-General.

Senator Kiprotich Cherarkey and the Jubilee Party were later joined in the case as interested parties.

Also Read: Uhuru Resurfaces Days After Court Ruling on His Jubilee Seat

The petition followed a parliamentary motion dated May 4, 2026, seeking to review and vary the retirement benefits of a former president over the former head of state Uhuru Kenyatta’s continued leadership role in the Jubilee Party.

While the High Court declared the relevant provisions unconstitutional, it declined to quash the parliamentary motion.

Meanwhile, Justice Mwamuye held that the motion had not resulted in a completed or final decision that could be quashed through judicial review.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for more updates