In double blow for the inner circle of the Ruto's administration, the High Court has firmly slammed the door on any hopes for a temporary return to office.
This latest development follows the earlier, landmark ruling that declared several senior advisory positions legally void and unconstitutional.
Not content to go quietly into the night, a group of the advisers to William Ruto had petitioned the judiciary for a six-month grace period.
The officials have argued that they needed the extra time to facilitate an orderly handover and tie up loose administrative ends.
The court, however, isn't buying it. In a ruling minutes ago, the presiding judge has dismissed the application as both legally baseless and unfounded.
The logic from the bench is straightforward that if the positions themselves were found to be unconstitutional or unlawfully established in the first place, there is no legal hook to hang a transition period on.
This isn't just a blow to the individuals involved but it’s a significant statement on the limits of executive appointments.
By rejecting the bid for a six-month extension, the judiciary has signaled that that administrative convenience does not trump constitutional adherence.
Secondly, that the null and void status of these roles is absolute, effective from the moment of the initial ruling.
For the embattled officials, the road ends here. Without the shield of a court-mandated transition, the exit is immediate and final.
The ruling serves as a stark reminder that in the face of the law, even the most influential titles at State House are subject to the ultimate check and balance.