The Court of Appeal has dealt a significant procedural blow to the government’s defense of the controversial Housing Levy, summarily rejecting a late affidavit filed by Housing Principal Secretary Charles Hinga.

In a ruling delivered this morning, the appellate judges dismissed the application to introduce new evidence, terming it an "afterthought" intended to patch up the state's porous legal arguments. The rejected document reportedly contained claims that the Affordable Housing project has been "scaled up" and enjoys "massive public support"—assertions the court deemed irrelevant to the constitutional questions at hand.

Desperation in the Corridors of Justice

The rejection of PS Hinga’s affidavit signals the judiciary’s growing impatience with the state's chaotic litigation strategy. The government had hoped to use the new filing to prove that the levy is already bearing fruit, arguing that halting it would cause irreparable economic harm. However, the bench maintained that the legality of a tax cannot be justified by its expenditure.

"You cannot tax Kenyans illegally and then justify it by saying you have already spent the money," legal expert Willis Otieno explained outside the court. "The rejection of this affidavit strips the government of its 'public interest' shield. They must now argue on the law, not on sentiment."

• The Hinga Defense: The PS had sought to introduce data showing that thousands of Kenyans had supposedly received keys to new units. Critics have long argued these numbers are inflated and unverifiable.
• The Stakes: The Housing Levy remains the single most unpopular policy of the Kenya Kwanza administration, deducting 1.5% from the gross salary of every employee. A final ruling declaring it unconstitutional would force the state to refund billions of shillings—a fiscal nightmare for the Treasury.

A Test of Separation of Powers

This development sets the stage for a high-stakes final judgment. The government has repeatedly attacked the judiciary for "sabotaging" development, but the courts have held firm. By refusing to admit the new affidavit, the judges have signaled that they will not be swayed by political projects masquerading as legal defenses.

"The window for the government is closing," observed constitutional lawyer Bobby Mkangi. "If they lose this appeal, the entire housing card house collapses."