Laikipia County has escalated its legal battle against the proposed establishment of an Ebola Quarantine and Isolation Facility within its jurisdiction, arguing that the project raises serious public health, governance, economic and child protection concerns that were not adequately addressed before its rollout.
In a replying affidavit filed before the High Court, County Executive Committee Member for Health Albert Taiti said the county is not opposed to national efforts to strengthen preparedness against infectious disease outbreaks, but strongly objects to the manner in which the project was conceived and implemented.
He told the court that the proposed facility would directly affect residents, public health systems, emergency response structures and the county’s governance framework, yet key constitutional requirements on consultation and participation were allegedly ignored.
“The 4th Interested Party fully appreciates the primacy of national public health preparedness measures aimed at preventing, detecting and responding to infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies,” Mr Taiti stated.
However, he argued that decisions involving high-risk pathogens such as Ebola demand strict adherence to transparency, scientific assessment, stakeholder engagement and constitutional compliance.
The dispute comes at a time when the national government has intensified efforts to bolster preparedness for highly infectious diseases, including Ebola, following outbreaks in parts of East and Central Africa that exposed gaps in surveillance and emergency response systems.
President William Ruto has, in recent public policy positions, maintained that strengthening epidemic preparedness infrastructure is critical to national security, with emphasis on isolation and quarantine facilities as part of broader health system resilience.
Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale has similarly defended the expansion of isolation capacity, arguing that Kenya must invest in rapid-response health infrastructure to deal with emerging and cross-border disease threats.
Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has, on his part, consistently stressed the need for strict adherence to constitutional requirements in government projects, particularly public participation and consultation with affected communities.
At the centre of the dispute is Laikipia County’s claim that it was not meaningfully involved in critical stages of the project, including site identification, risk assessment, contingency planning and emergency response coordination.
Mr Taiti said the omission undermines the constitutional principles of cooperative governance and devolution.
“The absence of meaningful consultation undermines the principles of cooperative governance and devolution as entrenched in the Constitution,” he said.
The county further argues that decisions involving Ebola must be anchored on robust scientific evidence, full transparency and inclusive stakeholder engagement, especially given the high-risk nature of the pathogen.
It also contends that the proposed facility threatens the right to the highest attainable standard of health under Article 43 of the Constitution, citing concerns over containment capacity, emergency preparedness and public safety.
A key point of contention is the proposed location of the facility within the Kenya Air Force Base in Nanyuki, where Laikipia Airbase Primary School and Laikipia Airbase Junior School operate.
The schools serve children of both military personnel and civilian families living within and around the installation.
Laikipia argues that placing an Ebola isolation facility within the same compound raises unresolved child protection and institutional safety concerns, particularly in the absence of detailed mitigation measures.
The county says no sufficient evidence has been provided to show that child impact assessments, school safety evaluations, evacuation plans or child-specific emergency response strategies were undertaken before the site was selected.
Citing Article 53(2) of the Constitution, Mr Taiti insisted that the best interests of the child must be a primary consideration in all matters affecting children.
The county has also warned that the project could have far-reaching economic implications, particularly for tourism, which remains a key economic pillar in Laikipia.
Nanyuki Town, located about eight kilometres from the proposed site, is a key tourism and investment hub and serves as a gateway to major attractions including Ol Pejeta Conservancy, Ol Jogi Conservancy and Mount Kenya National Park.
According to the affidavit, there have already been reports of booking cancellations following news of the proposed facility, an early indication, the county says, of reputational risk to the region’s tourism sector.
Officials warn that any sustained disruption could trigger job losses and significantly affect livelihoods dependent on hospitality, travel and conservation-linked enterprises.
Beyond safety and economic concerns, Laikipia County is also questioning whether adequate public participation was undertaken before the project was announced.
It argues that affected communities were not sufficiently engaged, contrary to constitutional requirements on openness and inclusion in decision-making processes.
The county is now urging the High Court to subject the project to full judicial scrutiny, seeking a determination on whether constitutional thresholds on public participation, intergovernmental consultation, public health safeguards and the precautionary principle were met.
At the heart of the dispute is a broader national tension between centralised public health preparedness and devolved governance concerns, underscoring recurring friction in Kenya’s implementation of high-risk infrastructure projects.
