Heated CDF debates mark public participation forums
Some argue that the MPs are attempting to legitimize a fund that was previously declared unconstitutional by the courts.
The public participation phase of the Constitutional (Amendment) Bill, 2025, concluded on Thursday, amidst heated debates about the legitimacy of the process.
The four-day exercise, which ran from May 4 to May 7, saw Members of Parliament (MPs) lead countrywide delegations to gather views on whether the National Government Constituency Development Fund (NG-CDF), National Government Affirmative Action Fund (NGAAF), and Senate Oversight Fund should be enshrined in the constitution.
While the process was intended to allow citizens to share their perspectives, the legality of the public participation and the amendment itself has been questioned by political analysts and legal experts.
Some argue that the MPs are attempting to legitimize a fund that was previously declared unconstitutional by the courts.
One of the most vocal critics, Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) leader Raila Odinga, wasted no time in condemning the National Assembly’s efforts. Odinga accused MPs of trying to secure an illegal takeover of county functions.
He further criticized the government for undermining devolution, stating, "There’s a gazette notice that they want to amend the Constitution to legalize this CDF. What does the National Government have to do with the counties? In counties, we’ve got executive powers to implement."
This call to preserve devolution was echoed by several lobby groups.
Among them, the Katiba Institute, along with five other organizations, went to court to halt the process.
They sought an injunction to prevent the Controller of Budget from approving any funds for the public participation exercise.
Their petition stated that public resources were being wasted on a process that, upon closer inspection, was not only constitutionally redundant but also violated established constitutional principles.
Their petition further demanded that President William Ruto be stopped from assenting to the bill.
The groups argue that MPs are overstepping their constitutional mandates by attempting to amend the constitution in ways that could potentially weaken the country’s legal framework.
Legal experts have also weighed in, criticizing MPs for their efforts to “mutilate” the Constitution rather than fulfill their intended roles of oversight and legislation.
Some suggest that the attempt to entrench the NG-CDF and related funds in the Constitution undermines the independence of county governments and the principles of devolution, which are enshrined in the current Constitution.
As the debate rages on, the public remains divided.
Supporters of the Bill argue that entrenching the funds will ensure their sustainability and transparency, while opponents see it as an overreach by the central government that threatens the spirit of devolution.