Wamuzi News Ke
In a sweeping verdict heard today, the Constitutional Court declined to halt the construction of President William Ruto’s controversial Sh1.2 billion mega-church at State House.
A full hearing has been scheduled for September 22, 2025, but work on the massive religious complex continues unabated.The decision clears the way for an 8,000-seat sanctuary to rise within the State House compound, despite widespread allegations of legal breaches and public backlash.
The court ruled against issuing a conservatory order requested by lawyers challenging the project, citing a lack of jurisdiction over land disputes—a matter more suited to the Environment and Land Court.
The Attorney General’s office supported this position in court.Lawyers for the petitioners had argued that the church violates constitutional safeguards—including the separation of church and state, public participation requirements, transparency, equality, and non-discrimination.
They contended that the President cannot use private funds to erect a religious facility on public land, demanding the project be subjected to competitive approval and oversight.
Opponents warned that allowing construction to proceed would normalize religious infrastructure on public land, risk marginalizing other faiths, and undermine secular governance. Critics also raised the alarming possibility of religious favoritism, arguing that if a church can be built, other groups might demand equally costly mosques or shrines.
In response to the outrage, President Ruto has defended the project, insisting it is funded personally and clarifying that its purpose is to replace an old iron-sheet chapel already on site. He denounced the cost estimates, noting that an eleven-story office block would cost significantly less.
The President maintained that no taxpayer money is being used.Today’s ruling is likely a turning point. Legal experts warn the absence of oversight and public involvement sets a dangerous precedent. Until the September hearing, the church will remain under construction—and the nation remains deeply divided.
This verdict reinforces the urgency of upcoming debates over constitutional limits, public land use, and the role of faith in public institutions. Kenya now faces a constitutional battleground over who decides what belongs in the heart of the republic.
