In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, November 11, 2026, Justice Roselyne Aburili ruled that the restrictions imposed on refugees seeking work permits amounted to indirect discrimination and violated their right to equal treatment and human dignity.
The court directed the government to review its policies and procedures governing refugee work permit applications within 360 days. It also ordered the Director of Immigration Services to determine all pending applications within 180 days and provide written explanations whenever an application is rejected.
The decision followed a petition filed by Kituo Cha Sheria and other petitioners, who challenged the administrative barriers preventing refugees from accessing employment opportunities in Kenya's formal labour market.
The petitioners argued that although Kenyan law recognises the right of refugees to work, the procedures used by immigration authorities had made it difficult for them to enjoy that right in practice.
Justice Aburili found that immigration authorities had applied an unpublished policy that effectively excluded refugees from consideration for work permits. She ruled that the practice violated constitutional provisions guaranteeing equality before the law and protection against discrimination.
The judge also found that the lack of clear procedures for handling applications, unreasonable delays and failure to provide written reasons for decisions amounted to violations of the right to fair administrative action under Article 47 of the Constitution.
In explaining the importance of the ruling, the judge observed that refugees should not be viewed simply as people seeking assistance, but as individuals who have been forced to leave their homes, livelihoods and communities because of circumstances beyond their control.
She emphasised that Kenya has a constitutional, legal and moral responsibility to protect refugees, citing the Constitution, the Refugees Act of 2021 and international conventions to which the country is a signatory.
The ruling comes against the background of longstanding concerns over the challenges refugees face when seeking formal employment. Although the Refugees Act provides recognised refugees with the right to engage in gainful employment, run businesses or practise professions for which they hold recognised qualifications, administrative requirements have often complicated access to these opportunities.
One of the major obstacles has been the Class M work permit application process, which requires refugees to navigate procedures involving immigration authorities and the Department of Refugee Services.
The court's decision is therefore expected to improve transparency and accountability in the processing of applications. Immigration authorities will be required to publish clear guidelines and ensure that applicants receive timely decisions.
The judge also retained supervisory jurisdiction over the matter to monitor the implementation of the orders and ensure that the government complies with the directives.
Beyond employment, the ruling could have wider economic implications by supporting refugees who want to use their skills, earn a living and contribute to the communities hosting them.
However, the ruling does not automatically grant every refugee a work permit. Instead, it requires the government to establish fair, transparent and accessible procedures through which eligible applicants can have their applications considered without discrimination.
Leave a Reply