Court asked to halt State financial pledges for Bayern-Ajax match at Raila Odinga stadium

By  Joseph Wangui

Correspondent

Nation Media Group

Six Kenyans have asked the High Court to stop the government from committing public funds to the planned Bayern Munich-AFC Ajax friendly match, demanding disclosure of the financial arrangements behind the January 5, 2027 match.

The petitioners want interim orders barring the State from authorising, allocating, releasing or spending public money on the event at Raila Odinga International Stadium, at Talanta Sports City, unless the expenditure is shown to comply with the Constitution and financial laws.

They are also seeking orders to stop the government from entering financial commitments, guarantees, indemnities or contractual obligations that could expose taxpayers to liabilities connected with the match.

In the petition, they further ask the court to stop any negotiations, engagements or transactions between the State and the two clubs pending the hearing and determination of the case.

The six say President William Ruto’s announcement that the event would be delivered through corporate partnerships and a self-sustaining commercial model does not establish whether public resources will be used or taxpayers will carry part of the cost.

"Describing the event as privately sponsored does not, by itself, establish that the Government and Kenyan taxpayers are completely free from direct or indirect financial obligations,” they state in the supporting affidavit.

The President announced on October 28 that Bayern Munich and Ajax would play the friendly at the new stadium on January 5, 2027.

The petitioners are Erick Sayialel, Julius Kimani, Dickson Kimathi, Nicholas Ochieng, Mulinge Muteti and Collins Otieno.

They have sued the Attorney-General, the Sports Cabinet Secretary, the National Treasury Cabinet Secretary and Sports Kenya. The Law Society of Kenya and Katiba Institute have been listed as interested parties.

The applicants want the respondents compelled to disclose, within seven days, all sponsorship agreements and contracts with the two clubs or their representatives.

They also want the identities of corporate sponsors, their respective financial contributions and obligations, and the total financial value of the event, including payments to Bayern Munich and Ajax.

The requested disclosure covers budgets for appearance fees, travel, accommodation, security, insurance, hospitality and other logistical expenses.

The petitioners also want details of any public funds, government guarantees, subsidies, indemnities, public personnel, security services, transport or other State resources committed to the event.

They want all financial records, procurement documents, sponsorship agreements, contracts, correspondence, approvals and Cabinet memoranda relating to the match preserved until the case is determined.

The petition cites media reports published on October 30 2026 indicating that Bayern Munich could receive five million euros, approximately Sh724.6 million, as an appearance fee.

However, the petitioners say they have not independently verified the reported figure and want the Government to provide official confirmation.

“We emphasise that the reported amount has not been independently verified by us and that we seek official disclosure and verification from the Respondents,” Mr Sayialel says in the supporting affidavit.

The case raises questions over who will meet the visiting teams’ appearance fees and logistical costs, whether public facilities and personnel will be provided at public expense, and whether the Government will receive revenue or other measurable benefits.

The petitioners want an independent audit of all public expenditure and financial commitments relating to the event through the appropriate public oversight institutions. They also seek a declaration that any expenditure incurred without lawful authority or contrary to constitutional public finance requirements is unconstitutional and unlawful.

They rely on Articles 35 and 201 of the Constitution, which provide for access to information held by the State and require openness, accountability and prudent use of public money.

They also cite constitutional provisions on public expenditure, budget approval, procurement, public service accountability and the management of public resources.

The petitioners argue that Kenya faces competing demands for public funding, including unemployment, healthcare, education, roads and access to essential services. They want the Government to demonstrate that any financial commitment to the match is lawful and offers value for money.

They insist they are not opposed to international sporting cooperation or hosting foreign football teams. Instead, they argue that the stadium, developed using public resources, should promote Kenyan sporting talent, local employment and sustainable economic opportunities.

The applicants have asked the court to certify the matter urgent and hear it on a priority basis. 

The court is yet to determine the petition or grant the orders sought.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.