The High Court has issued interim orders restraining the Standard Group Limited from republishing allegations linking President William Ruto’s daughter, Charlene Ruto, to a Sh2.8 billion Kenya Police Service uniform tender.
The orders followed an application by Charlene challenging a Standard publication of August 30, 2026, which included a front-page feature headlined “THE TRAIL…” and a page six story titled “Police uniform tender trail links Alusala teacher and First Family.”
Charlene, through her lawyers Kitinya and Co Advocates, told the court that the reports expressly or by implication associated her with the procurement and created an impression that she participated in, supplied under, or benefited from the tender.
She argued that the claims were contradicted by a subsequent clarification from the National Police Service concerning Nalitex Limited, which she said had been linked to the allegations.
According to court documents, the National Police Service clarified that Nalitex Limited did not participate in the procurement process, was not awarded the contract, was not a subcontractor and did not receive any purchase order or payment in relation to the tender.
The service identified Bedi Investments Limited as the contractor.
Charlene further told the court that she had served the Standard with a written demand and right of reply notice seeking a correction, retraction and apology over the publication.
She argued that despite the demand, the disputed material remained available online and could continue to be circulated and republished digitally, which she said perpetuated the alleged injury.
In seeking the interim orders, Charlene asked the court to restrain the defendants from repeating, republishing, reposting, distributing or otherwise disseminating the same or substantially similar allegations concerning her.
She also sought an order directing the Standard to disable or remove the online and digital versions of the publications or, alternatively, place a clear corrective notice on them.
The court granted interim prayer number two of the Notice of Motion, effectively stopping further dissemination of the contested allegations pending further directions.
The respondents have been given seven days to file their responses to the application before the court proceeds with the substantive issues.
The matter will come up for mention on October 19, 2026.