A Nairobi motorist has filed a constitutional petition challenging the legality of the Traffic (Motor Vehicle Inspection) Rules, 2026, asking the High Court to suspend their implementation and ultimately declare them unconstitutional.
In the petition lodged before the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court, petitioner Charles Mugane argues that the regulations were introduced without complying with mandatory constitutional and legal requirements. The suit names the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA) and the Attorney General as respondents, while the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), Katiba Institute, and the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) have been listed as interested parties.
According to the court papers, Mugane contends that the process leading to the enactment of the regulations violated several constitutional provisions, including those safeguarding national values, equality, access to information and the right to fair administrative action. He maintains that the alleged procedural flaws render the regulations “invalid, null and void ab initio” for failing to comply with the Constitution.
The petitioner further argues that NTSA’s actions infringed on the legitimate expectation that public bodies would exercise their statutory mandate in a manner that is transparent, lawful and consistent with constitutional principles. He states in the application that the impugned rules “not only render the said purported passing of the impugned Rules unconstitutional but also infringe the Applicant’s legitimate expectation” that the Authority would conduct its affairs in accordance with the law.
Mugane also urges the High Court to intervene before the regulations take full effect, arguing that failure to grant interim relief would prejudice both motorists and the wider public. In his application, he states that “failure to grant the orders sought… will cause irreparable harm to the public,” adding that “it is in the public interest that the same be averted by issuance of the interim reliefs sought.”
He further submits that the balance of convenience favours granting the conservatory orders, arguing that the application is intended to preserve constitutional integrity pending the hearing and determination of the petition. The petitioner states that “the balance of convenience lies in granting the orders sought,” adding that “it is just for the purposes of justice and equity and the overarching purpose of constitutional integrity and the rule of law” for the court to grant the relief sought.
The regulations under challenge were made on February 9, 2026, and introduce a new licensing and inspection framework for motor vehicle inspection centres across the country. Among the prescribed charges are an annual inspector’s licence fee of Ksh2,000, licensing fees of Ksh1 million for inspection centres in Cluster One counties, Ksh500,000 for Cluster Two counties, and Ksh300,000 for private mobile inspection units.
The petition also references an NTSA public notice issued on March 27, 2026, in which the Authority withdrew the rollout of its Instant Fines Management System. At the time, NTSA said the withdrawal was necessary to allow the public to better understand the procedures for handling minor traffic offences before implementation.
The High Court is expected to issue directions on the petition, which seeks declarations that the impugned regulations are unconstitutional together with other reliefs. The matters raised in the petition remain allegations that will be determined after all parties have been heard.
