President William Ruto’s chief economic advisor, David Ndii, has reacted to the High Court ruling declaring the offices of Presidential Advisors unconstitutional, describing it as a “pyrrhic victory” and questioning the need for formal advisory structures.
The High Court recently allowed a petition challenging the creation and staffing of these offices, ruling that they contravened constitutional provisions and the Public Service Commission framework.
The judgment emphasized that executive power must be exercised in accordance with the Constitution, ensuring transparency, merit-based appointments, fiscal responsibility, and public participation.
Ndii, however, took to X to downplay the significance of the court decision, stating:
“We don’t need state offices to advise the President. We supported him for two years on the road to victory. We can do it as an informal kitchen cabinet over breakfast every morning.”
His comments highlight a preference for informal advisory mechanisms over formal, state-funded offices.
Ndii argued that practical, trusted advice often happens outside official channels, relying on experience and personal rapport with the President rather than bureaucratic structures.
The ruling raises questions about the future of presidential advisory offices, which have long been criticized for operating without sufficient oversight.
As the government considers its next steps, Ndii’s stance signals that informal advisory teams may continue to play a central role in shaping policy, even without formal recognition or allocated state resources.