Former Nairobi Governor Anne Kananu has defended the cooperation agreement between President William Ruto and Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja, dismissing claims that the deal amounts to a transfer of county functions to the National Government.
Clarifying Constitutional Provisions
In a statement issued on Friday, Kananu argued that critics are misinterpreting constitutional provisions, stressing that a “cooperation agreement” is legally distinct from a “transfer of functions.”
Drawing from her experience during the formation of the Nairobi Metropolitan Services (NMS), Kananu recalled that four key county functions health services, transport, planning and development, and public works were formally transferred to the National Government under Article 187 of the Constitution.
She explained that the NMS arrangement involved a complete shift of operational control, with staff seconded to the agency, revenue streams such as parking fees collected by the Kenya Revenue Authority, and a significant portion of the county budget redirected to support the transferred roles.
“That is what a transfer of functions entails,” Kananu said, noting that while she remained constitutionally accountable as governor, day-to-day execution rested with the national administration.
Cooperation vs. Transfer
Kananu contrasted that with the newly signed framework, which she said is anchored in Articles 6(2) and 189 of the Constitution, requiring consultation and cooperation between the two levels of government rather than surrender of devolved powers.
According to her, the agreement is designed to mobilize additional resources for Nairobi, injecting an estimated Ksh.80 billion into the city on top of the county’s annual allocation of about Ksh.40 billion.
She emphasized that Sakaja remains the county’s chief executive and chairs the implementation committee overseeing the projects, even as national government representatives participate.
Accountability and Oversight
Addressing concerns about oversight, Kananu maintained that the arrangement does not create accountability gaps. She explained that national funds remain subject to scrutiny by the National Assembly, while devolved matters continue to fall under the oversight of the Senate.
“All funds move through structured government systems subject to audit, parliamentary scrutiny, and established accountability institutions,” she stated.
On public participation, Kananu said constitutional values must be interpreted alongside obligations for intergovernmental collaboration, adding that the fact the matter is before the courts demonstrates that safeguards remain active.
Nairobi’s Unique Status
Kananu concluded by underscoring Nairobi’s unique status as Kenya’s capital, arguing that structured national support for infrastructure, water and sewerage systems, roads, lighting, waste management, and security aligns with global practice.
“Nairobi is not an ordinary county; it is the capital city and the face of Kenya, and globally capital cities operate with structured national support because of their strategic economic and political significance,” she said.
Conclusion
Kananu’s defense highlights the constitutional distinction between cooperation and transfer of functions, positioning the Ruto-Sakaja agreement as a resource mobilization framework rather than a dilution of devolution. The debate underscores Nairobi’s strategic importance and the balancing act between local autonomy and national support.
