The government, in anticipation of the January 26, 2024, court ruling, will continue to collect the housing levy. This decision follows a directive from a three-judge Court of Appeal bench, comprised of Judges Lydia Achode, John Mativo, and Mwaniki Gachoka, who deemed it appropriate to maintain the status quo until the specified date.
The court is expected to decide whether to overturn or extend the existing directives at that time.The state, represented by attorney Kiragu Kimani, argued before the appellate judges that failing to grant stay orders on the High Court decision, made on November 28, 2023, would have severe consequences.
The High Court had declared the housing levy unconstitutional, citing discrimination, as only employed Kenyans were contributing funds. However, the state had secured a stay order until January 10, 2024, pending a potential appeal, which is set to expire next Wednesday.
The government pleaded for permission to continue collecting the levy while awaiting a final decision, asserting that not doing so would result in irreversible harm to its revenue collection efforts. Kiragu Kimani emphasized the irreversible nature of the consequences, emphasizing the potential impact on the implementation of the affordable housing program.
In the absence of a granted stay order, Kimani warned that the government would lose a crucial opportunity to collect the necessary revenue for the affordable housing program, emphasizing the irreversibility of this effect. He further mentioned that if the court ultimately deems the housing levy unconstitutional, those who have already paid may be eligible for refunds.
Moreover, the state argued that the affordable housing plan has generated approximately 120,000 jobs, and a denial of their plea could jeopardize these employment opportunities. Attorney Mahat Somane appealed to the court, describing it as the government’s “last hope.”
Contrary to the government’s stance, the initial petitioners, including Katiba Institute, Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition, and Eric Theuri, President of the Law Society of Kenya, opposed the application. Theuri contended that the requested orders would enable the government to enforce unlawful taxes and, as such, should fail on those grounds.
