The High Court of Kenya recently delivered an interim ruling in the petition filed by the Green Thinking Action Party challenging the Standards (Standards Levy) Order, 2025 (Legal Notice No. 136 of 2025). The petition sought to suspend the levy, arguing that it was enacted without proper public consultation, regulatory impact assessment, or parliamentary oversight. The court, however, declined to issue interim conservatory orders, noting that the petitioner had not demonstrated sufficient immediate harm. As a result, the levy remains in force while the court prepares for a full hearing to determine its constitutional validity.  

A central concern in the petition was the lack of meaningful public participation. The Green Thinking Action Party argued that stakeholders, including manufacturers and industry associations, were not adequately consulted before the levy was enacted, undermining transparency and accountability.  

The petition highlighted that proper engagement would have included stakeholder consultations, public hearings, and a regulatory impact assessment to evaluate how the levy would affect different sectors of the economy. Beyond procedural concerns, the petitioners argued that the revised levy represents an unprecedented escalation in costs for manufacturers, with some annual levies rising from as little as KSh400,000 to between KSh4 million and KSh6 million. They also challenged the expanded definition of “manufacturer,” contending that service-oriented businesses such as dry cleaning operations, garages, software developers, and computer engineering firms were improperly included, effectively broadening the levy’s reach beyond its intended scope.  

In addition, the petition contended that the levy prioritises revenue collection over regulatory oversight, shifting away from the Kenya Bureau of Standards’ (KEBS’) original mandate to support industrial development, quality assurance, and consumer protection. The petitioners warned that the levy could increase production costs, which might be passed on to consumers. At the same time, some small and medium-sized enterprises could struggle to absorb the additional financial burden or even be forced to scale down operations.  

In defence, KEBS and other government respondents described the levy as lawful, rational, and necessary. KEBS emphasised that it has not received government funding since the 2012/2013 financial year, making internally generated revenue, including the standards levy, essential to sustain operations, maintain national quality infrastructure, and protect consumers. The government also clarified that the levy rate has not changed and remains at 0.2 per cent of monthly turnover, the same rate applied since the original 1990 Order, arguing that the alleged 1,400 per cent increase was a misrepresentation of the calculation methodology.  

The 2025 Order was framed as a rational adjustment following decades of stagnation, reflecting prevailing economic conditions and ensuring that KEBS can fulfil its statutory mandate. Exemptions and relief measures were introduced to protect smaller businesses, including a full exemption for manufacturers with an annual turnover under KSh5 million and the ability to deduct VAT, excise duty, and discounts from turnover before calculating the levy. The government maintained that only large manufacturers with a turnover exceeding KSh2 billion would be significantly affected.  

The petition not only highlighted procedural gaps but also provided an opportunity to consider how public participation in regulatory processes can be strengthened. Enhancing public engagement could involve structured public hearings and industry consultations before introducing or revising levies, online platforms for submitting feedback, and the publication of regulatory impact assessments in advance to clarify potential economic effects. Collaboration with industry associations and chambers of commerce can ensure that Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), which may be disproportionately affected, have adequate representation. At the same time, periodic review forums allow businesses and the public to discuss the fairness and effectiveness of existing levies. Such measures would strengthen transparency, accountability, and trust in Kenya’s regulatory institutions, ensuring that levies serve their intended purpose without unintended economic burdens.  

With the interim ruling, businesses must continue complying with the levy while the High Court schedules a full hearing to examine its constitutional validity. The court will assess procedural compliance, including whether adequate public participation occurred, as well as the fairness of the levy and the appropriateness of the manufacturer definitions. Depending on the outcome, the court could uphold the levy, strike it down in its entirety, or declare specific provisions invalid, requiring targeted amendments. Even if upheld, the case is likely to influence policy discussions on regulatory funding, SME protection, and the balance between raising revenue and maintaining fairness in industrial regulation.  

For businesses, the ruling signals the need to plan for compliance and potentially higher operational costs, while consumers may face modest price increases on locally manufactured goods. At the same time, KEBS will benefit from additional resources to continue its work in quality assurance, compliance monitoring, and consumer protection, which could have long-term benefits for both industry and the public.  

The High Court’s interim decision underscores the ongoing tension between the government’s need to fund regulatory institutions and the constitutional requirement for fairness, transparency, and proportionality.  

Enhancing public participation, as highlighted by this case, is central to maintaining legitimacy and trust in Kenya’s regulatory framework. Kenyans can expect the levy to remain in effect in the short term. Still, its ultimate fate will depend on the full constitutional hearing and any subsequent appeals, with implications for industrial policy, business operations, and consumer costs for years to come.