The Milimani Law Courts /FILE
The High Court has temporarily suspended a process initiated by the Institution of Engineers of Kenya (IEK) to nominate persons to the Engineers Board of Kenya (EBK), pending the hearing of a petition challenging the legality of the exercise.
Justice Gregory Mutai issued conservatory orders stopping the implementation of the nomination process that commenced through an Expression of Interest issued by the IEK on August 25, 2026.
The orders followed a petition filed by Francis Awino, who argues that the process was initiated without the required authority and raises concerns over the legality of the nominations.
In his directions, Justice Mutai certified Awino's application as urgent and allowed it to be considered during the court recess.
The court ordered that the application be served on the respondents and the Attorney-General, who is listed as an interested party, and directed them to file their responses within 14 days of service.
“Pending the inter partes hearing of the Motion.., a conservatory order is hereby issued suspending and restraining the implementation, continuation or completion of the nomination process commenced by the 1st Respondent (IEK) pursuant to the Expression of Interest dated 25th August 2026 for the nomination of persons to the Engineers Board of Kenya,” the judge ordered.
Justice Mutai further restrained the IEK and its officers from proceeding with the next stages of the process.
“The 1st Respondent, its officers, Council, committees, agents and/or representatives are hereby restrained from shortlisting, selecting, nominating or transmitting to the 3rd Respondent (Transport CS) any names arising from the impugned Expression of Interest,” the order states.
The court ordered that the CS should not “act upon, approve, appoint or gazette any person nominated by the 1st Respondent pursuant to the impugned Expression of Interest.”
The application will be heard inter partes on October 26 before Justice Roselyn Aburili.
Awino argues that the IEK issued the Expression of Interest shortly after its newly elected Council assumed office on August 19.
According to the petition, the Expression of Interest gave members until August 28 to submit their names for consideration, creating what the petitioner described as an extremely short period within which the process could move from the submission of names to shortlisting, selection and nomination.
The petitioner contends that, to his knowledge, the newly elected council had not held a meeting or passed a resolution authorising the commencement of the nomination process before the Expression of Interest was issued.
“The central issue raised in the substantive Application is whether the impugned nomination process was commenced lawfully and by an organ of the 1st Respondent possessing the requisite authority under the IEK Constitution and the Engineers Act,” Awino states in his application.
He further argues that allowing the process to continue could result in nominations being forwarded to the Cabinet Secretary and subsequent appointments being made before the court determines the legality of the process.
Awino also raised concerns over an earlier nomination list allegedly submitted by the IEK to the Cabinet Secretary on November 19, 2025, whose status he says remains unresolved.
“The commencement of a fresh nomination process while the status of the earlier nomination remains unresolved creates an immediate risk of competing nomination processes and appointments,” the application states.
The petitioner says the court's intervention is necessary to preserve the subject matter of the dispute and ensure that appointments to the statutory regulatory body are undertaken in accordance with the constitution and the law.
