By Billy Mijungu
The clock is ticking on the National Government Constituency Development Fund. It is not just a matter of legality anymore. It is a matter of principle. And this time, the Constitution is not just watching, it is fighting back.
A bold petition now before the High Court may finally be the door that shuts this controversial fund for good. The argument is as clear as daylight. You cannot sneak past the architecture of the Constitution and expect it not to respond.
The 2010 Constitution envisioned a clean, structured, and devolved government, not scattered personal projects and political fiefdoms masquerading as development funds.
The proposed Constitution of Kenya Amendment Bill 2025 is the latest Trojan horse. It seeks to anchor not one but three funds into the Constitution itself: the National Government Constituencies Fund, a Senate Oversight Fund, and the National Government Affirmative Action Fund. On paper, it may sound progressive. In practice, it is the slow poisoning of our governance structure.
Turning constituencies into a third governance unit under the national executive is a direct attack on the two tier structure, national and county. Anchoring budgets for these funds within the Constitution undermines both revenue sharing and the spirit of parliamentary oversight. In essence, it gives MPs and Senators a budget line but not the responsibility or transparency that comes with it.
The Constitution did not stumble into place. It was designed. It was fought for. And it has safeguards. Article 255 demands that any amendment affecting the sovereignty of the people, the structure of devolution, national values, or the functions of Parliament must go through a referendum. The drafters of this Bill appear to have either overlooked that fact or deliberately ignored it.
The petitioners have asked the court to intervene now, before the damage is done. They want the High Court to declare that creating these funds falls under Article 255 and therefore must face the people in a referendum. It is a vital legal checkpoint, one that may well preserve the soul of the Constitution.
In truth, this case is not just about funds. It is about the future. It is about protecting the dream of devolution from being eaten alive by the claws of centralized patronage. In our lifetime, we may just witness the final burial of the National Government Constituency Development Fund. Not because Parliament woke up but because the Constitution fought back.
