A serious legal crisis has emerged after two High Courts issued directly opposing orders over the importation of duty‑free rice linked to National Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi’s programme, creating confusion within government agencies and raising concerns about respect for court authority.
The dispute traces back to Gazette Notice No. 10353, published on July 28, 2025, which authorised the duty‑free importation of up to 500,000 metric tonnes of Grade 1 milled white rice.
On August 19, 2025, the High Court in Kerugoya (Petition HCCHRPET/E009/2025), presided over by Justice Edward Muriithi, halted full implementation and allowed only a limited tranche of 250,000 metric tonnes, valid until October 31, 2025.
The court placed the entire rice import programme under its supervision and required the government to report on local rice stocks and shortages.
Rice Case Background
On December 22, 2025, Justice Muriithi declined to let the matter collapse on public‑interest grounds and permitted Kirinyaga County Senator James Kamau Murango and David Mathenge, the MCA for Baragwi Ward, to take over the petition as substituted petitioners.
Despite that judicial control, a new instrument—Gazette Notice No. 262—was signed on December 23, 2025, and published on January 9, 2026.
It purported to amend the earlier notice by extending the duty‑free window from December 31, 2025, to May 31, 2026.
Also Read: Ruto, Muhoho Kenyatta State House Meeting Sparks Debate
The substituted petitioners then moved the Kerugoya court for protective and coercive relief, accusing senior state officers of defying subsisting orders and attempting to revive and extend the suspended scheme without permission.
On January 16, 2026 at 9:25 a.m., Justice Muriithi certified the contempt application as urgent and, pending directions set for January 19 at 2:30 p.m., issued interim conservatory orders for three days.
He restrained any reliance on Gazette Notice No. 262 and ordered the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) to use its facilities to seize and detain consignments allegedly imported in violation of the court’s orders.
A penal notice warned that disobedience would attract sanctions.
The Kerugoya filings named specific shipments arriving at Kilindini Harbour: cargo discharged by M/V IVS CRIMSON CREEK (off‑takes for Preferred Grains Ltd) and M/V SPICA ETERNITY (off‑takes for Ecoview Commodities Ltd, and other listed consignees), with cargo manifests indicating rice sourced from Thailand and India (including Kandla).
The contempt application also sought personal accountability from senior officials, including KRA Commissioner‑General Humphrey Wattanga and the Commissioner for Customs and Border Control, Dr. Lilian Nyawanda, for allegedly facilitating clearances under the contested extension.
Dramatic Turn in Nairobi
Four days later, events in Nairobi took a dramatic turn.
Also Read: Inside The Career of Francis Meja, Ruto’s Nominated PSC Chairperson
On January 20, 2026, in Milimani, Justice Bahati Mwamuye, sitting ex parte, issued mandatory conservatory orders compelling the immediate clearing, release and customs entry of all pending and incoming shipments imported under Gazette Notice No. 10353 of 2025 and/or Gazette Notice No. 262 of 2026, provided they met inspection, quality and safety standards.
The court further directed state agencies to apply the two gazette notices to all taxes and levies for qualifying consignments and fixed a mention for February 11, 2026.
With opposing orders in force, the controversy has escalated into a constitutional test of judicial harmony.
Conflicting court orders have brought port operations to a standstill and left officials unsure which orders to follow, as the country waits for a clear decision on duty‑free rice imports.
Way forward
On January 21, the High Court in Kerugoya issued further orders late in the evening, restating that its orders of 16th January 2026 remain in force despite the Milimani orders, and noting that the orders in Milimani were obtained with material non-disclosure of the Kerugoya orders.
“That as there is already an order of the Court in this matter granted on 16/1/2026 and extended on 19/1/2026 and 20/1/2026, the order in the High Court at Nairobi issued on 20/1/2026 must have been granted without notice of the prior orders of the same Court. To avoid multiplicity of orders and counter-orders by the same Court sitting at different stations, this Court cannot make an order upon an order, and it is sufficient that its orders are served upon the relevant respondents,” declared Justice Muriithi.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
