Latest

President Ruto says govt to comply with court ruling on Housing Levy » Capital News


NAIROBI, Kenya, Nov 28 – President William Ruto now says the government will comply with the High Court ruling on the Housing Levy.

Speaking during the 5th Congress of the International Trade Union Confederation-Africa in Nairobi, the head of state stated that the government will align the relevant statutes with the Supreme Law.

“I know the court has said we should go and readjust the law to make it aligned appropriately. That we are going to do so that the 120,000 people can become 200,000 and 500,000 in the next five years because if we don’t engage these people in productive work, they will become a very big challenge to all of us,” he stated.

He indicated that the levy is important as it will benefit all Kenyans and should not be dismissed as it will also reduce unemployment among the youth.

“The young people out there, unless we create real opportunities, and you know we used to know that we are going to grow the economy and the economy is going to create jobs. We are beyond that,” he said.

“We have to e deliberate, we have to be intentional about where we are going to create those jobs.”

The High Court in the meantime issued a temporary order stopping the execution of a decision declaring Section 84 of the housing levy under the Finance Act 2023 unconstitutional.

The three judge-bench led by David Majanja said that pending the determination of an application for an appeal against their judgement, there should be a stay of execution until January 10, 2024.

The decision to issues a stay order arose from an application by the attorney general through lawyers George Murugara, Mahat Somane and Charles Mutinda on grounds that the state wants to appeal the decision of the whole judgement of the court.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

The application by the state was opposed by lawyer Evans Ogada, Frederick Ogolla and Ochieng Odinga.

A three-judge bench had earlier has declared the Housing Levy as unconstitutional for lack of a comprehensive legal framework.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *