By ERIC JUMA
The National Government Constituencies Development Fund (NG-CDF) has funded the construction of 14 police stations across the country over the past eight years through its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programme.
According to NG-CDF Board management led by Benjamin Magut, two of the 14 police stations are located in Rarieda Sub-County, Siaya County.
Speaking after inspecting the completed Riat Kolemo Police Station in Asembo, Rarieda, Magut said the two projects had a combined cost of Sh23 million.
“The completed police station at Riat Kolemo consumed Sh16 million, while the police station project yet to be constructed in Madiany will cost Sh7 million and will be funded by the NG-CDF kitty under CSR,” he said.
Magut spoke during a groundbreaking ceremony for the Madiany Police Station, where he said the Sh7 million project was being undertaken in honour of Rarieda MP Otiende Amollo.
He said the NG-CDF Board had decided to recognise Otiende for his role, together with other parliamentary lawyers, in defending the fund in court.
“The NG-CDF Board saw it fit to thank Otiende for defending the kitty together with other parliamentary lawyers in court,” Magut said.
He said the NG-CDF had faced the threat of being scrapped following a court challenge over its constitutionality but had continued operating pending a final determination by the Supreme Court.
“This year, June 30, 2026, NG-CDF was to be scrapped off or collapsed, but it is still ‘breathing’ because of a spirited fight by parliamentary lawyers led by Otiende,” he said.
Magut said the fund would continue supporting development projects in constituencies as the legal battle over its future proceeds.
“The NG-CDF has survived and will continue to grow constituencies and thrive because the legal team that was mobilised by Dr Otiende is still on it and justifying the need to have it,” he said.
He expressed optimism that the Supreme Court would uphold the NG-CDF framework, saying the lawyers had presented a strong case in defence of the fund.
“Even now that the NG-CDF is at the Supreme Court, we expect a favourable decision and all the credit will go to Otiende and the lawyers who decided to give pro-bono service,” Magut said.
The comments come against the backdrop of an ongoing legal challenge to the NG-CDF Act, 2015.
Wanjiru Gikonyo and Cornelius Oduor Opuot lodged a notice of appeal challenging a Court of Appeal decision that upheld the legality of the NG-CDF Act.
The notice, dated February 6, 2026, indicated that the petitioners were dissatisfied with the judgment and intended to ask the Supreme Court to review the findings and orders issued by the Court of Appeal.
The contested ruling was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Court of Appeal President Justice Daniel Musinga and Justices Francis Tuiyott and A.O. Muchelule.
The Court of Appeal overturned a High Court decision that had invalidated the NG-CDF Act in its entirety.
In its judgment, the appellate court faulted the High Court for failing to undertake what it considered a comprehensive constitutional assessment before striking down the legislation.
The judges said matters concerning public finance, devolution and intergovernmental relations require careful consideration and judicial restraint.
The Court of Appeal further held that the NG-CDF framework does not interfere with the constitutional functions of county governments or undermine the principles of devolution.
However, the court struck out Section 43(9) of the Act, which linked the tenure of constituency fund managers to the lifespan of Parliament and election cycles.
The judges ruled that the provision blurred institutional boundaries and violated the principle of separation of powers.
The removal of the section did not affect the overall validity of the NG-CDF Act.
On public finance, the appellate court rejected arguments that the NG-CDF operates outside constitutional controls, noting that allocations to the fund are approved annually through the national budget process and are subject to parliamentary oversight and audit by the Auditor-General.
The court also cautioned against nullifying legislation based on speculative risks, stating that constitutional review should be based on demonstrable violations rather than hypothetical outcomes.
