A Kenyan court has once again stood firm on constitutional accountability by refusing to suspend the ruling that cancelled NCBA Group’s 384.5 million shilling stamp duty exemption. The decision keeps the spotlight on how public money is managed and signals a major step toward fairness in taxation.
The ruling stems from Senator Okiya Omtatah’s 2019 petition. He challenged the exemption issued through Legal Notice No. 112 of 2019 during the merger between NIC Group and Commercial Bank of Africa.
Omtatah argued the tax break had no foundation in the Stamp Duty Act and violated Article 201 of the Constitution, which demands fair taxation and transparency in the use of public funds.
The court agreed, grounding its position in Article 2(4), which makes any unconstitutional action automatically invalid and impossible to revive through litigation. Omtatah described the exemption as an unlawful favor that allowed a powerful corporation to skip taxes owed to the people of Kenya.
He has now urged the Kenya Revenue Authority to recover the unpaid amount without delay and called on the National Treasury to end irregular tax waivers. Omtatah reminded public officers of their responsibilities under Articles 10, 73, and 232, insisting that accountability must guide every decision affecting public finance.
The ruling comes at a time when Kenyans are increasingly questioning why major corporations receive exemptions while ordinary citizens face rising taxes and economic pressure. Many see the court’s move as a necessary correction and a sign that fairness in taxation is still possible.
What happens next will show how serious institutions are about enforcing the law. KRA is expected to move in and recover the 384.5 million shillings unless NCBA finds a new legal route, though experts say such attempts are unlikely to succeed. How quickly KRA acts will reveal whether tax laws apply equally to all players.
This decision also raises the bar for future exemptions. Treasury officials will face increased scrutiny, and corporations may find it more challenging to lobby for special treatment. Legal analysts say the case sets a strong precedent: any tax relief not rooted in law and constitutional principles risks being overturned.
The outcome now depends on what KRA does next, how NCBA responds, and whether Treasury adjusts its approach to tax waivers.
