ELDORET, Kenya – The Eldoret High Court has temporarily suspended the operations of the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) Pending Medical Claims Verification Committee following a legal challenge questioning its constitutionality.
In a ruling delivered by Justice Nyakundi, the court issued conservatory orders halting the committee, which was established under Gazette Notice No. 4069, Vol. CXXVII—No. 64, dated March 28, 2025.
The committee was tasked with auditing NHIF medical claims from July 2022 to September 2024, but the court’s decision prohibits it from compiling reports, making recommendations, or taking any action based on the notice.
“The operation of the NHIF Pending Medical Claims Verification Committee is hereby suspended pending the hearing and determination of the petition,” Justice Nyakundi ruled.
He also ordered that Health Cabinet Secretary Adan Duale, the Principal Secretary, and the Attorney General refrain from facilitating the committee’s activities or acting upon the Gazette notice.
The court’s order will remain in place until the petition, filed by Dr. Benjamin Magare Gikenyi, a Nakuru-based surgeon, and three others, is fully heard.
The petitioners argue that the committee’s formation was arbitrary and lacked the constitutional and legislative backing necessary to validate its operations.
Specifically, they contend that the committee’s mandate to audit NHIF claims over a specified period encroaches on the constitutional role of the Auditor-General, as outlined in Article 229(4)(g) of the Constitution.
The petitioners further claim that any audit of NHIF should be initiated through a formal request by the Cabinet Secretary to the Auditor-General, in line with the provisions of Article 254(2) of the Constitution and Section 37 of the Public Audit Act.
Justice Nyakundi noted that the petitioners had met the legal threshold for issuing conservatory orders but emphasized that this ruling did not prejudge the merits of the case itself.
“This determination does not reflect the court’s stance on the substantive merits of the petition, which will be decided after full arguments are presented by all parties,” the judge said.
The petitioners argue that allowing the committee to proceed with its mandate before the constitutional issues are resolved would limit the practical remedy available should the petition succeed.
The matter is scheduled for mention on June 2, 2025, where the court will further review the progress of the case.
