Kenya Insights

Category: Business

  • Where Did Sh250 Billion Eurobond Vanish To?

    Where Did Sh250 Billion Eurobond Vanish To?

    In the annals of Kenya’s financial history, few controversies have proven as enduring or as damaging to public trust as the mystery surrounding the Sh250 billion Eurobond that vanished into the labyrinthine corridors of government bureaucracy.

    Eight years after former President Uhuru Kenyatta’s solemn promise to “spend this money prudently,” the question remains: where did Kenya’s largest single foreign borrowing disappear to?

    Grand promise that turned into a nightmare

    On June 25, 2014, President Kenyatta stood before the nation with what appeared to be a financial masterstroke.

    Kenya had successfully floated a $2 billion sovereign bond—the country’s maiden venture into international capital markets.

    The initial tranche of Sh174 billion, part of what would eventually total Sh250 billion, was meant to usher in a new era of infrastructure development while simultaneously relieving pressure on domestic borrowing.

    “I want to assure you that the government will spend this money prudently,” the Uhuru declared from State House, Nairobi. Those words would later return to haunt his administration as one of the most hollow promises in Kenya’s recent political history.

    The Eurobond, issued in two tranches—$1.5 billion over 10 years and $500 million over five years was deposited with JPMorgan Chase in New York.

    On paper, the plan was elegant: use the proceeds for infrastructure development, provide budgetary support, and retire expensive domestic debt. In practice, it became a masterclass in how public resources can vanish without a trace.

    When dreams collided with reality

    The first red flags emerged not from opposition politicians or civil society, but from the economy itself. By 2015, the very outcomes the Eurobond was supposed to deliver had turned into their opposites. Interest rates, which were meant to decline due to reduced government borrowing domestically, soared to record highs of over 18%.

    The Kenya Shilling, expected to strengthen with dollar inflows, weakened from 87 to the dollar in 2014 to 102 in 2015.

    Opposition leader Raila Odinga, displaying the prescience that would later vindicate his skepticism, became the first prominent voice to question the Eurobond’s impact.

    In October 2015, he posed a question that would echo for years: “Kenya’s economy cannot absorb that kind of money in one year. It is too much. If it was used to build infrastructure, we would be seeing those infrastructure developments.”

    His follow-up was even more pointed: “Hiyo pesa ilijenga barabara gani? We spent Sh30 billion to build Thika highway, so the question remains where did the other Sh140 billion go?”

    Treasury’s crumbling defense

    Then-Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich found himself in the unenviable position of defending the indefensible.

    His initial response was dismissive: “I don’t understand why it takes so long to explain this, and the time it is consuming us to do very many important things rather than keeping on raising this. There is no money missing.”

    Rotich provided what appeared to be a detailed breakdown: Sh64.4 billion for infrastructure, Sh44.6 billion for planning, Sh21.07 billion for energy and petroleum, Sh15.06 billion for water and irrigation, and Sh14.21 billion for agriculture.

    Yet when pressed for specifics, the explanations crumbled. “The ministries are compiling the very specific projects that they applied on the money that we released to them,” he said—a statement that revealed the shocking absence of prior planning and oversight.

    Only the Ministry of Energy provided any concrete details, with then-Principal Secretary Dr. Joseph Njoroge claiming Sh21 billion had been used for “school electrification, transmission lines, geothermal exploration and drilling.” Even then, specific project allocations remained opaque.

    Enter Edward Ouko: The auditor who wouldn’t back down

    Edward Ouko

    Former Auditor-General Edward Ouko emerged as the unlikely hero of this saga—a forensic accountant who refused to accept political platitudes in place of financial accountability.

    His office uncovered evidence that $2bn in Eurobond cash that Kenya raised in 2014 may have been misused, prompting what would become one of the most comprehensive international financial investigations in Kenya’s history.

    Ouko’s determination to follow the money trail beyond Kenya’s borders drew unprecedented hostility from the executive.

    When he announced plans to conduct forensic audits involving meetings with US and UK financial institutions—including JPMorgan, the Federal Reserve Bank, City Transaction Services New York, and Barclays Bank, President Kenyatta’s response was swift and brutal.

    “When you say that the Eurobond money was stolen and stashed in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, are you telling me that the Kenyan government and United States have colluded?” Kenyatta posed at an anti-corruption summit, with Ouko present. “Who’s is stupid here? And he [Ouko] says he wants to investigate the Federal Reserve Bank of New York!”

    The public humiliation of the country’s chief auditor at a State House event signaled how seriously the administration viewed Ouko’s investigations—and how determined it was to shut them down.

    The damning findings

    By September 2016, Ouko’s investigations had produced the bombshell that opposition critics had long suspected: Sh215 billion could not be accounted for. The Auditor-General’s report revealed that none of the funds could be traced to specific development projects, a finding that contradicted every government assurance about prudent spending.

    Even more damaging was Ouko’s discovery that some funds had been expended outside the government’s Integrated Financial Management Information System—effectively creating a parallel, unaccounted financial structure that bypassed normal oversight mechanisms.

    The investigation, which extended to three continents and involved multiple international financial institutions, revealed systematic failures in financial management that went to the heart of government operations. As indicated in the Auditor’s Report for 2014/15, the receipt of net proceeds from commercial financing (Sovereign/Eurobond) of Sh215,469,626,035.75 accounted for in the 2014/15 financial year could not be ascertained as investigations into the receipts, issues, accounting and utilisation of the funds related to the sovereign/Eurobond was still ongoing.

    Political warfare and intimidation

    The Eurobond controversy became a lightning rod for broader questions about governance and accountability under the Jubilee administration.

    Deputy President William Ruto, in a December 2016 Citizen TV interview, dismissed the allegations as “utter nonsense,” while President Kenyatta used the 2015 Jamhuri Day celebrations to issue a thinly veiled threat: “If you make accusations and fail to prove them, you too will also be held accountable.”

    The political pressure on Ouko’s office was intense and personal.

    Following publication of the audit, Dr Ouko said some of his officers had received death threats. Ouko and his team found themselves being accused of taking money from opposition parties to tarnish the record of the government.

    The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission’s decision to grill Treasury officials, including CS Rotich and Principal Secretary Kamau Thugge, only intensified the political stakes around what had become a defining scandal of the Uhuru presidency.

    The inconclusive conclusion

    In a development that raised as many questions as it answered, the 2019 final audit report concluded that “There is sufficient evidence that all the proceeds of the sovereign bond were either eventually received into the Consolidated Fund or paid out for authorised purposes”. However, this conclusion came with a critical caveat that undermined its apparent exoneration: the report could not trace the funds to specific development projects.

    The auditor advised that in future money raised through international sovereign bonds should be earmarked and traced to specific development projects.

    He said under the circumstances, his office could not ascertain if indeed all the money raised through the sovereign bond was spent on development.

    This qualified clearance satisfied neither critics nor supporters. While the government claimed vindication, the inability to demonstrate concrete development outcomes meant the fundamental questions about value for money and project delivery remained unanswered.

    Broader pattern of impunity

    The Eurobond controversy was not an isolated incident but part of a broader pattern of financial mismanagement that characterized the Jubilee administration.

    Even as questions about the first Eurobond remained unresolved, Kenya proceeded to issue additional Eurobonds worth Sh202 billion in 2018 and over Sh200 billion in 2019, raising the country’s total Eurobond debt to over Sh650 billion.

    This continued borrowing occurred despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund about Kenya’s mounting debt burden, which had reached Sh4.8 trillion by 2018. The pattern suggested a government more concerned with accessing funds than with demonstrating accountability for their use.

    Edward Ouko’s legacy

    In August 2019, Mr Ouko retired, closing the curtains on a magnificent yet equally controversial run in public service. His eight-year tenure had been marked by unprecedented scrutiny of government spending and a willingness to challenge the most powerful figures in the land.

    The recognition of his exceptional record of public service as Auditor-General of the Republic of Kenya, and his bravery and dedication in combating corruption in the country came through the ICAEW Outstanding Achievement Award in 2024, acknowledging what many Kenyans already knew: Ouko had fought a largely solitary battle for financial accountability at the highest levels of government.

    The questions that remain

    As we reflect on this national scandal eight years later, several disturbing questions remain unanswered:

    **Where are the infrastructure projects?** Despite claims that billions were spent on development, Kenya’s infrastructure gaps remain glaring. The promised transformation of the country’s physical landscape never materialized in proportion to the massive borrowing.

    Why the parallel systems? The discovery that funds were disbursed outside the Integrated Financial Management Information System suggests deliberate attempts to avoid oversight. Who authorized these parallel disbursement mechanisms, and why?

    What happened to accountability? Despite clear evidence of systemic failures in financial management, no senior officials faced consequences. The culture of impunity that allowed the Eurobond mystery to persist unchecked remains intact.

    How much did Kenya actually benefit? Beyond the arithmetic of money in and money out, what tangible value did ordinary Kenyans receive from this massive borrowing? The economic indicators suggest the answer is disappointingly little.

    The unlearned lessons

    Perhaps most troubling of all is what the Eurobond saga reveals about Kenya’s approach to public finance. Despite numerous investigations, including one by the Auditor General, Edward Ouko, the exact whereabouts of the missing Eurobond money remain a mystery. The scandal underscored the lack of accountability in Kenya’s financial management and raised concerns about the country’s debt.

    The government’s response to legitimate questions about public resource management set a dangerous precedent. By attacking the messenger rather than addressing the message, the Uhuru administration normalized a culture where accountability is seen as political persecution and transparency is treated as betrayal.

    A national reminder

    As Kenya grapples with an unprecedented debt crisis that threatens to undermine economic sovereignty, the Eurobond mystery serves as a sobering reminder of how we arrived at this precipice.

    The Sh250 billion that vanished into the bureaucratic ether represents more than missing money—it represents a missed opportunity to build a more prosperous and equitable society.

    The infrastructure projects that never materialized, the accountability mechanisms that were deliberately circumvented, and the public trust that was systematically eroded all constitute a legacy that extends far beyond the Uhuru administration.

    Future governments will inherit not just the debt burden but the institutional weaknesses that made such massive financial disappearances possible.

    Lest we forget, the Eurobond scandal is not ancient history but a contemporary cautionary tale about the costs of political acquiescence and bureaucratic impunity.

    Until Kenya develops robust mechanisms for tracking public resources from procurement to delivery, and until citizens demand real accountability from their elected leaders, the country remains vulnerable to even larger financial scandals.

    The question “Where did the Sh250 billion go?” may never receive a satisfactory answer.

    But the more important question—“How do we prevent this from happening again?”—still awaits a response from Kenya’s political leadership.

    The cost of continued silence grows higher with each passing day, measured not just in shillings and cents but in the trust between citizens and their government.

    In the end, Edward Ouko’s investigations may not have recovered the missing billions, but they established an invaluable precedent: that even the most powerful figures in government are not above scrutiny.

    Whether future auditors will have the courage to follow his example and whether the Kenyan public will support them when they do, will determine whether this national reminder serves as a cautionary tale or a blueprint for continued impunity.

  • Cabinet Approves Sale of Kenya Pipeline Company for NSE Listing

    Cabinet Approves Sale of Kenya Pipeline Company for NSE Listing

    NAIROBI, July 29 – President William Ruto’s Cabinet has given the green light for the partial privatisation of Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC), marking a strategic shift toward private sector-led growth in the country’s energy infrastructure.

    The decision, reached during Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting at State House, will see the government divest part of its shareholding in the profitable energy parastatal through a listing on the Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE).

    This move aims to democratise ownership by allowing ordinary Kenyans to acquire shares in one of the country’s most strategic assets.

    “The Cabinet gave the green light for the reinstatement of Kenya Pipeline Company into the privatisation programme, paving the way for partial divestiture of government shares,” State House announced in a dispatch following the meeting.

    KPC, which plays a central role in Kenya’s energy supply chain, has maintained consistent profitability over the years.

    However, Cabinet noted that despite this strong financial performance, the company has not reached its optimum potential due to bureaucratic constraints and public sector inefficiencies that have limited its market value.

    The privatization strategy is expected to inject private capital and professional expertise into the firm, modernizing its operations and positioning it as a regional logistics and energy powerhouse.

    Cabinet emphasized that this approach follows successful precedents where state-controlled entities transformed into high-performing companies after privatisation.

    “Safaricom, Kenya Commercial Bank, and KenGen are prime examples of formerly state-controlled entities that became high performing companies following privatisation, driving shareholder value, expanding regionally, and creating thousands of jobs,” the Cabinet statement noted.

    The move represents a broader policy shift aimed at reducing the government’s direct involvement in commercial enterprises while enabling the private sector to drive growth, efficiency, and innovation.

    This aligns with the administration’s strategy of focusing public resources on delivering essential services rather than commercial ventures.

    The privatisation of KPC is anticipated to boost investor confidence and support the development of Kenya’s capital markets.

    The inclusion of the company in the privatisation pipeline will proceed under existing laws and regulatory frameworks that guide the sale of public assets.

    The decision comes as part of a wider economic restructuring agenda by the Ruto administration, which seeks to embrace private sector-led growth while maintaining operational discipline and accountability in public enterprises.

    The partial sale is expected to unlock significant value for both the government and future shareholders while ensuring the company remains strategically important to Kenya’s energy security.

    The timeline for the privatization process and the percentage of shares to be offered to the public will be determined through the established regulatory frameworks governing such transactions.

  • Kenya’s Debt Costs to Remain High Due to Local Borrowing, Moody’s Says

    Kenya’s Debt Costs to Remain High Due to Local Borrowing, Moody’s Says

    Kenya’s cost of servicing its debts is expected to remain stubbornly high, ratings agency Moody’s said on Wednesday, as the government leans on the domestic debt market to fund its budget shortfalls.

    The East African nation has one of the highest debt interest costs to revenue ratio in the world, Moody’s said, and spends a third of government revenue on settling interest payments.

    “Kenya will rely predominantly on the domestic market to meet its fiscal financing needs with approximately two-thirds of its financing, or just under 4% of GDP per year, from domestic sources,” the agency said in an issuer report.

    “This reliance will continue to weigh on debt affordability, a key constraint in Kenya’s credit profile.”

    Finance Minister John Mbadi set the government’s fiscal deficit for the financial year starting this month at 4.8% of economic output, narrower than the 2024/25 deficit of 5.7%, when he presented the budget to parliament last month.

    But Moody’s said that target could slip as the government confronts acute fiscal pressures.

    “Kenya’s revenue generation capacity remains structurally weak,” Moody’s said, citing missed revenue collection targets.

    The government needs to secure a new financing programme with the International Monetary Fund, the ratings agency said, to help it deal with annual external debt repayments that stand at $3.5 billion on average.

    The government will hold another round of talks with IMF officials in September in a bid to clinch the programme, the central bank chief Kamau Thugge said last month.

    “A successful IMF programme could anchor investor confidence and reduce external borrowing costs,” Moody’s said.

  • Real People Directors Sanctioned Over Sh2.6bn Kenyan Bond Fraud

    Real People Directors Sanctioned Over Sh2.6bn Kenyan Bond Fraud

    Three former directors of Real People Kenya have lost their final appeal against regulatory sanctions over the diversion of Sh2.63bn raised from Kenyan investors, closing a protracted enforcement battle that has tested the reach of the country’s capital markets watchdog.

    In a ruling delivered on July 11, the Capital Markets Tribunal upheld in full penalties imposed in March 2021 by the Capital Markets Authority against Neil Grobbelaar, Arumugam Padachie and Bruce Schenk, all former executives linked to the South African parent of Real People Kenya Ltd.

    The decision affirms fines and market bans tied to what regulators found to be the misapplication of bond proceeds that had been earmarked for lending to small and micro enterprises in Kenya.

    Investors are estimated to have lost about Sh1.3bn after the company failed to meet its obligations at maturity.

    The tribunal dismissed the appeal in its entirety, finding that the appellants were sufficiently involved in the disclosure failures and the diversion of proceeds to justify the sanctions imposed by the regulator’s ad hoc enforcement committee.

    Bond proceeds routed offshore

    The case centres on a Sh5bn medium term note programme approved in June 2015.

    Real People Kenya raised Sh2.63bn in its inaugural tranche under an information memorandum that stated the funds would be used for onward lending to Kenyan small businesses.

    According to findings cited by the tribunal, Sh2.13bn, or 82 per cent of the amount raised, was transferred out of Kenya between August 2015 and December 2016. The bulk of the funds, Sh2.02bn, was remitted to Real People (Pty) Ltd in South Africa. Additional transfers were made to related entities in Uganda and Tanzania.

    The tribunal found that the redirection of funds was inconsistent with the stated purpose of the bond and occurred against a backdrop of deteriorating financial performance at the Kenyan subsidiary.

    The company moved from a profit of Sh256.9mn in the year to March 2015 to a loss of Sh592.7mn by March 2017.

    Regulators concluded that instead of supporting SME lending in Kenya, a significant portion of the proceeds was used to settle intercompany obligations within the wider group.

    Individual accountability

    Mr Grobbelaar, former group chief executive of Real People Investment Holdings Ltd and a non-executive director of the Kenyan unit, was fined Sh5mn and barred from serving as a director or key officer in any CMA-licensed entity until bondholders recover their principal and outstanding interest in full.

    Mr Padachie, the former group chief financial officer, and Mr Schenk, an executive director, were each fined Sh2.5mn and subjected to similar bans.

    In its determination, the tribunal held that the executives failed to exercise adequate oversight over the use of proceeds and, in the alternative, were involved in disclosures that were false, misleading or deceptive in light of how the funds were ultimately applied.

    The tribunal also noted potential conflicts of interest arising from overlapping roles across the South African parent and the Kenyan subsidiary at the time decisions were taken to channel funds towards settling group liabilities.

    From left-Real People Chief Executive Officer Daniel Ohonde, board member Nthenya Mule and Nairobi Securities Exchange chief executive officer Geoffrey Odundo during the bell ringing to mark the start of Real People bond trading at the Nairobi bourse on August 19, 2015.

    Long-running dispute

    The appeal was lodged in April 2021 after the CMA issued notices to show cause in 2020 and imposed sanctions through an ad hoc committee in March 2021.

    The appellants challenged both the substance of the findings and aspects of procedure and jurisdiction.

    The July ruling follows an earlier tribunal decision in June 2024 declining to halt disciplinary proceedings against five other former directors, including Norman Ambunya, Daniel Ohonde, Nthenya Mule, Charl Kocks and Yvonne Godo.

    In total, nine former directors have faced enforcement action arising from the bond issue, with cumulative fines exceeding Sh25mn. The tribunal ordered that each party bear its own costs.

    Signal to the market

    The case represents one of the most sustained cross-border enforcement efforts undertaken by the Capital Markets Authority in recent years.

    By conditioning the lifting of market bans on full repayment to investors, the regulator has linked individual rehabilitation directly to restitution.

    The decision comes amid a broader push by Kenyan authorities to hold directors personally accountable for disclosure failures in public debt offerings.

    In a separate matter, the CMA has sanctioned former executives of Chase Bank Kenya in connection with its Sh4.8bn bond programme, underscoring heightened scrutiny of governance and financial reporting standards.

    For bondholders in Real People Kenya, the practical question remains whether the outstanding Sh1.3bn plus interest can be recovered.

    While the tribunal’s ruling brings legal finality to the appeals process, enforcement across jurisdictions and the financial position of related entities will determine the prospects of restitution.

    What is clear is that the tribunal has affirmed the regulator’s authority to pursue individual directors for breaches tied to capital markets disclosures and the use of investor funds.

    For Kenya’s debt market, the judgment reinforces the principle that proceeds raised on the strength of an information memorandum must be applied strictly in accordance with its terms.

  • World Bank Stops KES 97 Billion Loan to Kenya Over Governance Reform Delays

    World Bank Stops KES 97 Billion Loan to Kenya Over Governance Reform Delays

    The World Bank has suspended the disbursement of a crucial KES 97 billion loan to Kenya following the government’s failure to implement key governance reforms as agreed under the lending facility.

    The frozen funds, equivalent to $750 million, were scheduled for release this month through a Development Policy Operations loan that requires Kenya to institute comprehensive reforms aimed at creating fiscal space and strengthening governance structures.

    Central to the impasse is Kenya’s delayed passage of the Conflict of Interest Bill, which seeks to establish stringent accountability measures for politicians and public officials.

    The legislation is designed to prevent government officials from influencing lucrative tender awards to companies they own or are linked to their associates.

    President William Ruto initially rejected the bill in June, citing 12 problematic clauses that he argued had weakened the proposed law.

    While the National Assembly accommodated his concerns, the Senate subsequently blocked key provisions, including those prohibiting government officials from seeking public tenders and requiring regular wealth declarations.

    Beyond the conflict of interest legislation, Kenya has also failed to implement other critical reforms including the adoption of a single bank account for public finances and the automation of government procurement processes to eliminate collusion and contract manipulation.

    World Bank Division Director Qimiao Fan confirmed that the release of funds remains conditional on Kenya completing all agreed prior actions and maintaining an adequate macroeconomic policy framework.

    The bank had previously disbursed KES 155 billion as the first tranche of this facility last year.

    The funding freeze creates a significant budget hole for Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi, who had not anticipated this delay in his fiscal planning.

    The government now faces the choice of increasing borrowing amid Kenya’s already substantial public debt burden or implementing spending cuts to balance the budget.

    Kenya’s reliance on World Bank financing is set to deepen, with the Treasury projecting loan requirements of KES 170.5 billion annually over the next four budget cycles, up from KES 129 billion in the recently concluded fiscal year.

    This increased dependence comes as the country has effectively ended its relationship with the International Monetary Fund after failing to meet 11 key conditions, resulting in the loss of KES 63.3 billion in potential IMF funding.

    The World Bank’s decision underscores the increasing pressure on developing nations to demonstrate concrete progress on governance reforms before accessing international financing, particularly as global lenders become more selective amid tightening fiscal conditions worldwide.

  • How A Chinese Firm Used Legal Loophole To Claim Ownership of Unoccupied Nairobi Prime Land For Free

    How A Chinese Firm Used Legal Loophole To Claim Ownership of Unoccupied Nairobi Prime Land For Free

    In a landmark ruling that has sent shockwaves through Kenya’s real estate sector, a Chinese construction firm has successfully acquired prime land in Nairobi worth millions of shillings without paying a single cent, exploiting a centuries-old legal doctrine that allows trespassers to claim ownership of abandoned property.

    China Jiangsu International Economic-Technical Cooperation Corporation East African Company (CJIETCCEA) walked into the Environment and Land Court earlier this year as a mere occupant of disputed land and emerged as its rightful owner, thanks to a legal principle known as adverse possession that dates back to British colonial law.

    Justice Christine Atieno Ochieng delivered the shocking verdict on July 3, declaring that the Chinese firm had legitimately acquired the 0.4609-hectare property approximately one acre of prime Nairobi real estate through twelve years of uninterrupted occupation while the original owners remained conspicuously absent.

    The case began in 2009 when CJIETCCEA discovered the property lying abandoned and decided to move in, transforming what was essentially sophisticated squatting into a multi-million shilling windfall through Kenya’s legal system.

    Guo Haudong, representing the Chinese firm, told the court a remarkable story of how his company stumbled upon the vacant land and decided to make productive use of it.

    What started as opportunistic occupation evolved into a thriving business operation complete with a hardware shop, construction materials yard, and residential facilities for staff members.

    The land’s original owner, China Jiangsu International Economic Technical Co-operation Corporation Limited (CJIETCCL), ironically another Chinese entity had apparently abandoned the property after gradually winding down operations in Kenya.

    The parent company, promoted by Chinese nationals who were residing in Kenya at the time, simply walked away from the valuable asset and never looked back.

    For twelve years, CJIETCCEA treated the land as their own.

    They connected utilities including water, electricity, and internet services.

    They hired local employees including Peter Ngure, Mary Njeri Wambugu, and James Makori Nyamao, who swore affidavits confirming they had worked on the property since 2012.

    The company took photographs documenting their improvements and investments over the years, creating an undeniable paper trail of occupation.

    The legal principle that enabled this remarkable transfer of ownership is adverse possession, a doctrine that allows someone to acquire legal title to land by occupying it openly, continuously, and exclusively for a specified period, in Kenya’s case, twelve years.

    Originally designed to prevent land from lying idle and to resolve boundary disputes, the law has become a double-edged sword that can strip negligent owners of valuable property.

    Justice Atieno carefully examined the requirements for adverse possession and found that CJIETCCEA had satisfied every criterion.

    The occupation was open and notorious visible to anyone who cared to look.

    It was continuous and uninterrupted for more than twelve years.

    Most critically, it occurred without permission from the registered owner, and the owner never took any action to reclaim the property.

    The judge noted that the legal clock started ticking in 2009 when CJIETCCEA first occupied the land.

    By 2021, the twelve-year statutory period had elapsed, and the original owner’s window to reclaim their property had permanently closed.

    The grace period that might have saved CJIETCCL’s ownership rights had expired while they remained unaware or unconcerned about the occupation of their valuable Nairobi asset.

    What makes this case particularly striking is the complete absence of the original owner from the legal proceedings.

    Despite being formally invited to participate in the case and having the matter advertised in local newspapers, CJIETCCL never appeared in court or filed any response.

    Their silence proved costly—literally millions of shillings costly.

    The doctrine of adverse possession, inherited from British common law, was designed for a different era when land records were less precise and boundary disputes more common.

    In colonial Kenya, it served to regularize occupation of land where documentation might be unclear or missing.

    Today, it represents a legal time bomb for absentee landlords and negligent property owners.

    Legal experts point out that adverse possession requires specific conditions to be met.

    The occupation must be hostile meaning without the owner’s permission.

    It must be actual, involving physical use of the property.

    It must be open and notorious conducted in a manner that would give the true owner notice if they were paying attention.

    It must be exclusive, the occupier cannot share control with the owner or others.

    Finally, it must be continuous for the full twelve-year period.

    CJIETCCEA’s case demonstrates textbook adverse possession.

    They used the land for commercial purposes, maintained residential facilities for staff, paid for utilities, and conducted business operations that were visible to anyone in the area.

    They neither sought nor received permission from the registered owner, satisfying the “hostile” requirement not through aggression but through occupation without legal right.

    The case also highlights the risks facing property owners, particularly foreign investors, who may acquire land in Kenya but fail to actively monitor and maintain their holdings.

    In an era where property values in Nairobi have skyrocketed, leaving prime real estate unattended for over a decade represents a costly oversight that the law does not forgive.

    For CJIETCCEA, what began as opportunistic use of vacant land has culminated in legitimate ownership of valuable Nairobi real estate.

    The company invested time, money, and effort into improving the property, employed local workers, and contributed to economic activity in the area.

    From their perspective, they transformed unused land into a productive asset while the legal owner remained absent.

    The ruling raises important questions about property rights and stewardship in Kenya’s rapidly developing urban areas.

    While adverse possession serves legitimate purposes in resolving land disputes and preventing valuable property from lying idle, it also creates opportunities for strategic occupation by savvy investors who understand the legal system.

    Property lawyers are now advising clients to conduct regular inspections of their land holdings and to take immediate legal action against any unauthorized occupation.

    The CJIETCCEA case serves as a stark reminder that property ownership in Kenya requires active stewardship as the law will not protect those who abandon their assets, regardless of their value or legal title.

    For the original owner, CJIETCCL, the loss represents a catastrophic oversight.

    Their failure to monitor their Kenyan property holdings or respond to the legal proceedings has cost them prime real estate in one of Nairobi’s most valuable areas.

    The company’s absence from the court proceedings suggests either a lack of awareness about the case or a decision that the property was not worth defending—a calculation that proved spectacularly wrong.

    The CJIETCCEA victory also reflects the growing sophistication of Chinese businesses operating in Kenya.

    Rather than simply walking away from disputed property, the company chose to pursue legal ownership through Kenya’s court system, demonstrating both knowledge of local law and confidence in the judicial process.

    This case is likely to inspire similar claims across Kenya, where rapid urbanization has left many properties in disputed ownership or unclear status.

    Property owners who have allowed unauthorized occupation of their land should take immediate action to prevent adverse possession claims, while potential claimants may see new opportunities in the legal precedent set by Justice Atieno’s ruling.

    The Environment and Land Court’s decision stands as a testament to the principle that in Kenya’s legal system, possession truly can become ownership but only for those patient enough to wait twelve years and bold enough to occupy land that doesn’t belong to them.

    For CJIETCCEA, that patience and boldness have paid off handsomely, transforming what began as trespassing into legitimate property ownership worth millions of shillings.

    As Kenya’s property market continues to evolve and mature, the CJIETCCEA case will be remembered as a watershed moment that demonstrated how colonial-era laws can still reshape modern property ownership in unexpected ways.

    For property owners across the country, it serves as an expensive lesson in the importance of vigilance in Kenya’s legal system, those who sleep on their rights may wake up to find they no longer have any rights at all.

  • Court Finds Safaricom Grossly Violated Its Managers Rights In Sh544M Device Disaster

    Court Finds Safaricom Grossly Violated Its Managers Rights In Sh544M Device Disaster

    In a damning judgment that exposes serious flaws in corporate governance at Kenya’s telecommunications giant, the Labour Relations Court has ordered Safaricom to pay Sh55 million to 17 former sales managers who were wrongfully dismissed over a botched device distribution project worth Sh544.5 million.

    The ruling by Justice Nduma Nderi represents more than just a financial blow to Safaricom – it reveals a troubling pattern of scapegoating by the company’s leadership when faced with operational failures of their own making.

    The case centers on events from 2018 when Safaricom summarily dismissed 17 Area Sales Managers from its Consumer Business Unit, blaming them for the loss of Huawei Y311 devices that later surfaced on competitor networks.

    The Huawei device project, launched in 2016, was designed to enhance subscriber registration processes to meet regulatory “know your customer” requirements.

    Safaricom distributed 90,000 devices at enormous cost, only to watch the initiative crumble due to what the court determined were “deficiencies in the operational procedures, policies and systems of the project” rather than individual negligence by the managers.

    What emerges from the court documents is a picture of a company that set up its managers to fail, then ruthlessly discarded them when the inevitable problems arose.

    The managers were held “accountable for all devices distributed despite involvement of other staff in the distribution process,” creating an impossible situation where they bore responsibility for outcomes beyond their individual control.

    The court’s finding that Safaricom subjected the managers to “unfair and impossible work conditions” while wrongly accusing them of negligence when failures resulted from systemic deficiencies speaks to a fundamental breakdown in corporate responsibility.

    This wasn’t simply a case of operational mishap – it was a deliberate decision by Safaricom’s leadership to sacrifice its own employees rather than acknowledge institutional failures.

    Perhaps most troubling is how Safaricom handled the dismissals themselves.

    The managers were terminated without notice and without payment in lieu of notice, violating basic employment law principles.

    They were denied a fair opportunity to defend themselves, trampling on rules of natural justice that should be sacred in any civilized workplace. The company’s Ethics and Compliance Department, ironically, became the instrument of this injustice.

    The financial impact extends beyond the immediate Sh55 million compensation.

    Safaricom claimed exposure to Sh6.7 million in direct losses plus potential regulatory penalties, yet the court’s findings suggest these losses stemmed from the company’s own systemic failures rather than individual misconduct.

    The real cost to Safaricom may be measured in damaged reputation and the precedent this case sets for how corporations treat their employees when projects fail.

    Emmanuel Dibo’s testimony from Safaricom’s fraud detection department painted a picture of devices going missing, appearing on competitor networks, and being mapped to individual customers rather than serving their intended registration purpose.

    Yet the court saw through this narrative, recognizing that such widespread failure indicated institutional rather than individual problems.

    The managers’ failed appeals within Safaricom’s internal processes reveal another layer of institutional failure.

    The company had multiple opportunities to recognize the injustice of these dismissals and correct course, yet chose to double down on its flawed position.

    Only the intervention of the Labour Relations Court finally delivered justice.

    Safaricom’s decision to file a notice of appeal against this judgment raises serious questions about the company’s commitment to learning from its mistakes.

    Rather than accepting responsibility and implementing reforms to prevent similar injustices, the telecommunications giant appears determined to continue fighting its former employees even after a court has definitively ruled against its position.

    This case should serve as a watershed moment for corporate accountability in Kenya.

    When billion-shilling projects fail, the solution cannot be to simply fire the people at the bottom of the hierarchy while protecting those who designed flawed systems and impossible working conditions.

    The Labour Relations Court’s ruling sends a clear message that such scapegoating will not be tolerated under Kenyan employment law.

    For Safaricom’s current employees, this judgment must provide both relief and concern.

    Relief that the courts will protect them from similar injustice, but concern that their employer’s first instinct when facing operational failures appears to be finding someone else to blame rather than addressing systemic problems.

    The Sh544 million device disaster reveals Safaricom as a company willing to sacrifice its own people to protect its image and leadership.

    The Labour Relations Court’s Sh55 million judgment represents more than compensation for wronged employees – it stands as a rebuke to a corporate culture that values scapegoating over accountability and institutional protection over individual justice.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

  • Fugitive Filipino Businesswoman Back in Kenya Despite Deportation Order Over Multimillion Car Dealership Fraud

    Fugitive Filipino Businesswoman Back in Kenya Despite Deportation Order Over Multimillion Car Dealership Fraud

    Exclusive Investigation: Gala Liane Beth evaded authorities after fleeing to Tanzania, now operating new venture while on prohibited immigrants list

    A Filipino businesswoman who fled Kenya to avoid deportation over allegations of defrauding a Japanese motor dealership of Sh40 million has quietly returned to the country and is believed to be operating under a new business setup, despite being declared persona non grata by immigration authorities.

    Gala Liane Beth, who disappeared in August 2020 just before her scheduled deportation, managed to slip back into Kenya after a month-long stay in Tanzania, armed with a new Philippine passport valid until 2030.

    Sources within the immigration department confirm she remains on the prohibited immigrants list, yet has successfully evaded capture for months while allegedly continuing business operations from Mombasa.

    The case began when Beth arrived in Kenya in February 2019 as a purchasing and shipping manager for Orange Garage PTE Limited in Nairobi.

    After resigning from her initial employer, she established Mottospot Limited and entered into a lucrative partnership with Japan-based World Navi Company Limited, facilitating the importation and sale of vehicles from Japan to the Kenyan market.

    However, the business relationship soured dramatically when Beth abruptly terminated her contract with World Navi on April 1, 2020.

    According to legal documents obtained by this investigation, the Japanese company accused her of stealing and selling their confidential customer database and pricing system to competitor IBC Auto, constituting a serious breach of her employment oath of confidentiality.

    “This was after you had blatantly breached the oath of confidentiality by stealing and selling our client’s customer database and pricing system to IBC Auto who is our client’s competitor,” stated lawyer Paul Mwangi, representing World Navi in correspondence that led to the criminal complaint.

    The situation escalated when World Navi reported to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations that Beth had failed to remit Sh40 million obtained from selling the company’s assorted vehicles.

    The Japanese firm simultaneously notified immigration authorities that they were no longer responsible for her presence in Kenya, triggering the cancellation of her work permit.

    Director Stanley Makombe of World Navi expressed frustration at the ongoing situation, stating, “We still hope to see her answer to her case. She defrauded a company of millions of shillings.”

    Immigration officials initially detained Beth for deportation in August 2020, and she appeared cooperative, promising to purchase her own ticket and leave after undergoing mandatory Covid-19 testing.

    However, in a calculated move that demonstrates premeditation, she used the purchased ticket not to return to the Philippines, but to flee to Tanzania instead.

    “Instead, she bought a ticket and left for Tanzania where she stayed for a month before coming back to Kenya. We understand she is somewhere in Mombasa,” revealed an immigration official familiar with the investigation.

    Director General of Immigration Evelyn Jepleting Cheluget  has issued a stern warning that Beth should not engage in any business activities within Kenya’s borders. “She should stay away from Kenya because she is a prohibited immigrant,” Jepleting emphasized, confirming her placement on the prohibited immigrants list.

    Adding another layer to the investigation, the Central Bank of Kenya is probing a suspicious Sh10 million transfer Beth received from Singapore in July 2020.

    The funds remain frozen in her DTB Bank account pending investigations into possible money laundering activities.

    In a startling development that adds another dimension to this case, sources now reveal that Beth is currently operating as Africa’s marketing manager for IBC Auto, the very same Japanese company that World Navi accused her of selling stolen customer databases and pricing information to in 2020.

    This employment relationship raises serious questions about IBC Auto’s due diligence processes and whether they were aware of her prohibited immigration status when hiring her for this continental role.

    The implications for IBC Auto extend far beyond reputational damage, particularly under Kenya’s stringent Data Protection Act of 2019.

    The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (ODPC) has demonstrated its willingness to impose the maximum penalty of KES 5 million for data protection violations, and companies face fines of up to five million KES or 1% of their annual turnover, whichever is lower, for infringement of data protection provisions.

    Given that World Navi’s original complaint specifically accused Beth of stealing and selling customer databases to IBC Auto, the Japanese company now finds itself in a precarious legal position.

    Kenya’s Data Protection Commissioner has clarified that employers bear vicarious liability for employee data breaches, meaning IBC Auto could face substantial penalties not only for the original alleged data breach but also for continuing to employ an individual with a documented history of data theft.

    The automotive industry in Kenya processes sensitive customer information including financial details, identification documents, and transaction records.

    Under the Data Protection Act, affected individuals can claim compensation for financial, emotional, or reputational harm resulting from data breaches, potentially exposing IBC Auto to civil litigation from customers whose data may have been compromised during the original breach allegations.

    The case raises serious concerns about immigration enforcement and the ease with which prohibited individuals can re-enter the country.

    Beth’s ability to return with new documentation and continue operations highlights potential gaps in border security and database coordination between immigration checkpoints.

    For potential business partners and customers, authorities warn that any dealings with Beth or entities connected to her operations could result in financial losses.

    The Directorate of Criminal Investigations continues to seek her whereabouts for questioning regarding the fraud allegations.

    Immigration officials urge anyone with information about Beth’s current location or business activities to contact the nearest police station or immigration office.

    Her case serves as a cautionary tale for the automotive import industry, where trust and financial integrity are paramount to legitimate business operations.

    The investigation continues as authorities work to locate and deport Beth while pursuing justice for the alleged multimillion-shilling fraud that has left a Japanese company seeking answers and restitution for their substantial losses.

  • Questions as Deported Turkish Businessman Allied to Ruto Pursues Solar Power Deal

    Questions as Deported Turkish Businessman Allied to Ruto Pursues Solar Power Deal

    A controversial solar power project linked to Harun Aydin, the Turkish businessman who was deported from Kenya in 2021 but maintains close ties to President William Ruto, is raising serious questions about transparency and due diligence in the country’s renewable energy sector.

    Unit 2HA Investment Energy Africa, a company where Aydin is listed as director and shareholder, has secured environmental approval to develop a 50-megawatt solar plant in Laikipia County despite glaring inconsistencies in its project proposal.

    The firm’s estimated budget of Sh155.47 million for the project appears woefully inadequate, representing less than three percent of what similar projects typically cost.

    Industry standards suggest that solar plants cost approximately $1 million per megawatt to construct, which would put Aydin’s project at around Sh6.4 billion rather than the declared Sh155 million.

    This massive discrepancy becomes even more puzzling when compared to other solar initiatives in Kenya, where 40MW plants have required budgets exceeding Sh6 billion.

    The project’s land requirements also defy conventional wisdom. While most solar installations in Kenya operate on 300 to 600 acres, Aydin’s venture proposes using 3,000 acres for a 50MW plant.

    A cancelled project of similar scope in the same Rumuruti location was planned for just 300 acres at a cost of Sh6.7 billion.

    Aydin’s return to prominence in Kenya’s business landscape marks a remarkable rehabilitation for someone who was detained and deported over allegations of terrorism financing and money laundering.

    His deportation came during a period of political tension between then-President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto, with the Turkish businessman caught in the crossfire of their deteriorating relationship.

    The businessman’s fortunes changed dramatically following Ruto’s ascension to the presidency in August 2022.

    Aydin has since been linked to significant government contracts, including participation in Kenya’s affordable housing program through his company MHOA Africa Limited, which is part of a joint venture tasked with building over 100,000 homes.

    What makes the solar project particularly concerning is the apparent disconnect between regulatory oversight and project implementation.

    While the National Environment Management Authority has approved the project, the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority confirmed it has yet to receive any permit application from the company.

    The timing and circumstances surrounding this project highlight broader questions about governance and the influence of personal relationships in awarding government contracts.

    Aydin’s presence at State House functions and his companies’ success in securing major deals despite his controversial past suggests a level of access that bypasses normal vetting processes.

    Kenya’s push toward renewable energy is commendable, with solar power currently contributing 3.6 percent of the country’s electricity generation.

    However, the integrity of this transition depends on transparent procurement processes and realistic project proposals that can actually deliver the promised outcomes.

    As the country grapples with energy security and the need for sustainable power generation, projects like Aydin’s solar venture serve as a test case for whether Kenya can balance its development needs with proper governance standards.

    The discrepancies in this proposal demand thorough investigation before any further approvals are granted.

    The energy sector’s credibility hinges on ensuring that all players, regardless of their political connections, meet the same rigorous standards for project viability and transparency.

  • US Passes First Major National Crypto Legislation

    US Passes First Major National Crypto Legislation

    Lawmakers in the US have passed the country’s first major national cryptocurrency legislation.

    It is a major milestone for the once fringe industry, which has been lobbying Congress over regulation for years and poured millions into last year’s election, backing candidates that included Donald Trump.

    The bill sets up a regulatory regime for so-called stablecoins, a kind of cryptocurrency backed by assets seen as reliable, such as the dollar.

    Trump is expected to sign the legislation into law on Friday, after the House passed the bill on Thursday, joining the Senate, which had approved the measure last month.

    Known as the Genius Act, the bill is one of three pieces of cryptocurrency legislation advancing in Washington that is backed by Trump.

    The president once derided crypto as a scam but his opinion shifted as he won backing from the sector and got involved in the industry as a businessman, with ties to firms such as World Liberty Financial.

    Supporters of the legislation say it is aimed at providing clear rules for a growing industry, ensuring the US keeps pace with advances in payment systems. The crypto industry had been pushing for such measures in hopes it could spur more people to use digital currency and bring it more into the mainstream.

    The provisions include requiring stablecoins, an alternate cryptocurrency to the likes of Bitcoin, to be backed one-for-one with US dollars, or other low-risk assets. Stablecoins are used by traders to move funds between different crypto tokens.

    The use of these coins, which are viewed as less volatile, has grown rapidly in recent years.

    Critics argue the bill will introduce new risks into the financial system, by legitimising stablecoins without erecting sufficient protections for consumers.

    For example, they said it would deepen tech firms’ participation in bank-like activities without subjecting them to similar oversight, and leave customers hanging in a convoluted bankruptcy process in the event that a stablecoin firm should fail.

    They had also tried to rally opposition to the bill by arguing that voting in favour was effectively condoning Trump’s business activities – including his family’s promotion of their own crypto coins.

    But it nevertheless drew significant support from Democrats, about half of which supported the bill, as well as the majority of Republicans.

    “Some members may believe passage of this bill, even with flaws, is better than the status quo. We believe this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the risks involved with these instruments,” a coalition of consumer and advocacy groups wrote in a letter to Congress this spring.

    They warned that passage would “allow the proliferation of assets that consumers will wrongly perceive as safe”.

    Analysts had expected Congress to pass all three bills earlier this week, but unexpected hiccups led to delays.

    The two other bills have passed the House and are headed to the Senate, where Republicans hold a narrow majority. Those bills would prevent the US central bank from establishing a digital currency and set up a regulatory framework for other forms of crypto.

    The advance comes as Trump is reportedly working on an presidential order that could allow retirement accounts to be invested in private assets, such as crypto, gold and private equity.

    The value of Bitcoin hit a new record this week, passing $120,000 (£89,000).

    But Terry Haines of Washington-based analysis firm Pangaea Policy, said he did not expect the other two bills, which are more significant, to go further.

    “This is the end of crypto’s wins for quite a while – and the only one,” he wrote. “When the easy part, stablecoin, takes ~4 to 5 years and barely survives industry scandals, it’s not much to crow about.”

    (BBC)

  • Del Monte To Kick Out Billionaire Peter Munga From 75-Acre Land

    Del Monte To Kick Out Billionaire Peter Munga From 75-Acre Land

    In a significant legal blow to one of Kenya’s most prominent business figures, billionaire Peter Munga, founder and former chairman of Equity Bank Group, has been ordered by a Nairobi court to vacate a 75-acre parcel of land belonging to Del Monte Kenya Limited in Murang’a County.

    The Environment and Land Court, presided over by Justice Anne Omollo, ruled that Munga must relocate Pioneer International School, a prestigious learning institution linked to him that currently operates on the disputed property.

    The court gave Munga until the end of December 2025 to complete the evacuation, allowing the school to finish its academic calendar without disrupting students’ education.

    The legal battle stems from a complex web of lease agreements and defaults that began nearly a decade ago.

    In 2013, Del Monte leased the 75-acre property to Goshen Gardens Limited for an eight-year term at a monthly rent of Sh550,000.

    However, by February 2015, Goshen Gardens had fallen behind on payments, prompting Del Monte to serve notice for termination of the lease.

    The situation became more complicated when Goshen Gardens’ director, David Kigwe, approached Del Monte about transferring the property’s assets to Munga, who was interested in acquiring the school premises.

    Following meetings in August and November 2015, Munga expressed his willingness to purchase the school for an additional Sh38 million and committed to paying outstanding and accruing rent, believing this would secure him a new lease agreement with Del Monte.

    Despite these negotiations and Munga’s continued rent payments, Del Monte discovered in October 2015 that Goshen Gardens had already handed over possession of the property to Pioneer International School without proper authorization.

    This unauthorized transfer became the crux of Del Monte’s legal challenge, as they argued that the lease had been transferred without their knowledge or consent.

    Justice Omollo’s ruling prioritized the welfare of students currently enrolled at Pioneer International School, stating, “I take regard to the best interest of the child to let the school calendar for this year run to an end before the students’ learning is disrupted.”

    However, she made it clear that the school must surrender the property by December 20, 2025, while continuing to pay monthly rent to Del Monte during the transition period.

    The court case, which Del Monte initiated in 2016, sought not only the eviction of the school but also the removal of all fixtures, fittings, and other assets from the property.

    Should Munga fail to comply with the court order, the Officer Commanding Ngati Police Station in Murang’a has been directed to enforce the eviction.

    This legal setback adds to the mounting challenges facing the billionaire businessman, who has previously faced other financial and legal pressures in recent years.

    For Del Monte Kenya Limited, the ruling represents a victory in their efforts to regain control of their property after years of legal wrangling.

    The food processing company had maintained throughout the proceedings that the unauthorized transfer of the lease violated the terms of their original agreement with Goshen Gardens.

    As the December deadline approaches, all eyes will be on how Munga navigates this transition while ensuring minimal disruption to the hundreds of students who depend on Pioneer International School for their education.

    The case serves as a reminder of the importance of proper legal procedures in property transactions and the potential consequences when lease agreements are not properly transferred or honored.

  • EXPOSED: ‘Dubious’ Development Bank Chairman Under Fire – CRB Blacklisted and Questionable Hiring Sparks Fury!

    EXPOSED: ‘Dubious’ Development Bank Chairman Under Fire – CRB Blacklisted and Questionable Hiring Sparks Fury!

    Nairobi, Kenya – July 19, 2025 – Michael Nyachae, the embattled chairman of the Development Bank of Kenya (DBK), is caught in a firestorm of controversy as civil society group Operation Linda Jamii drags him to court, demanding his ouster over a shady appointment and a damning Credit Reference Bureau (CRB) blacklisting that has tongues wagging across the nation.

    In a bombshell petition filed at the High Court’s Constitutional and Human Rights Division in Nairobi, the activist group is gunning to void Nyachae’s 2023 appointment by President William Ruto, branding it a blatant violation of Kenya’s Constitution.

    They claim the process was a secretive backroom deal, devoid of the transparency, competition, and integrity demanded by Articles 10, 73, and 232.

    “This was no appointment it was a stitch-up!” fumed Prof. Ogola, a key figure in the lawsuit, pointing to Nyachae’s alleged CRB red flag as proof he’s unfit to lead a public institution. “A blacklisted chairman? It’s a slap in the face to Kenyans!”

    The petition doesn’t spare the big guns, hauling the Central Bank of Kenya, the Industrial and Commercial Development Corporation (ICDC), the Public Service Commission, the Attorney General’s Office, and the National Assembly into the dock for allegedly turning a blind eye to the murky appointment.

    Operation Linda Jamii insists Nyachae’s selection flouted the Leadership and Integrity Act and the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) Act, accusing Parliament of shirking its oversight duties.

    They’re now demanding the court declare the appointment null and void, with a hearing set for July 28, 2025, before Justice E.C. Mwita.

    But that’s not all, Nyachae’s troubles are piling up faster than a Nairobi traffic jam.

    In a separate scandal rocking the courts, Eureka Holdings, a shareholder in Nyachae’s family-run Associated Auto Centre, has slapped him and two other directors, Aminnohamed Shamsudin and Mozez Ismael Jamal, with a lawsuit alleging they’ve run the company into the ground.

    Court filings reveal a trail of unpaid loans from Diamond Trust Bank, Credit Bank Limited, and Sidian Bank Limited, plus a jaw-dropping Sh7.79 million tax bill from the Kenya Revenue Authority that’s gone unsettled.

    Eureka is baying for blood, seeking to boot the trio from their director roles and freeze their assets to stop what they call a “financial freefall” that’s gutting shareholder value.

    Insiders whisper that Nyachae, son of the late Cabinet Minister Simeon Nyachae, is feeling the heat as his reputation hangs by a thread.

    “From dodgy loans to a questionable chairmanship, this is a man whose decisions are costing Kenyans dearly,” one source close to the case told us.

    With the courts poised to unravel these tangled messes, the nation watches as questions swirl: How did a CRB-blacklisted figure land such a plum post? And will justice prevail in this high-stakes drama?

  • ‪Netflix Profits Surge Off Ads, Higher Subscription Prices‬

    ‪Netflix Profits Surge Off Ads, Higher Subscription Prices‬

    Netflix reported stronger than expected second-quarter results Thursday, with profit jumping 45 percent year-over-year as the streaming giant benefited from subscription price increases and a growing advertising business.

    Revenue climbed 16 percent to $11.1 billion in the quarter ended June 30, beating analyst estimates and the company’s own guidance, while net profit surged to $3.1 billion.

    The company raised its full-year revenue forecast, noting that it expects revenue to be between $44.8 billion and $45.2 billion in 2025, up from a range of $43.5 billion to $44.5 billion.

    Netflix highlighted strong performance from its content offers in the quarter, with major hits including the third season of “Squid Game,” which drew 122 million views.

    It “has already become our sixth biggest season of any series in our history, with just a few weeks of viewing so far,” the company said in a statement.

    Other standout titles included the third season of “Ginny & Georgia” with 53 million views and “Sirens” with 56 million views.

    There was also the animated film “KPop Demon Hunters” with 80 million views, which became “one of our biggest animated films ever” and generated a soundtrack that topped music charts globally.

    “Korean content continues to be popular with our audience,” the company said, pointing to the continued success of international programming that has become a hallmark of Netflix’s global strategy.

    Netflix expressed optimism about the second half of 2025, highlighting an upcoming slate that includes the highly anticipated second season of “Wednesday,” the final season of “Stranger Things” and new films from major directors including Kathryn Bigelow and Guillermo del Toro.

    The company has also announced plans to expand live programming with marquee boxing matches and NFL games, as it continues to diversify its content offerings beyond traditional on-demand entertainment.

    Netflix shares have surged more than 40 percent year-to-date as investors have responded positively to the company’s shift toward profitability, which saw it crack down on password sharing and turn to ads for more revenue.

    The company counted over 300 million subscribers last December, at the end of a particularly successful holiday season, when it gained almost 19 million new subscriptions.

    But the company no longer discloses these figures, in order to focus on audience “engagement” metrics (time spent watching content).

    In the quarter, Netflix continued to build out its advertising capabilities, saying that it expects to roughly double ads revenue in 2025, though it did not provide specific figures.

    The service is forecasting $9 billion in revenues from its ad-based subscriptions by 2030.

    “With another robust earnings showing in Q2, Netflix continues a winning streak going back several quarters and cements its place as the leader among streaming services,” said Emarketer analyst Paul Verna.

    (AFP)

  • No Secrets: Govt Explains Sharp Rise in Fuel Prices

    No Secrets: Govt Explains Sharp Rise in Fuel Prices

    In Summary
    • A litre of petrol is now retailing at Sh186.31 in Nairobi, diesel (Sh171.58,) while kerosene is going for Sh156.14, up from Sh177.32, Sh162.91 and Sh146.93, respectively.
    • EPRA has pegged the increase on the landed cost, which went up in June (whose current pump prices are based on), even as crude prices dropped to $67.73 per barrel.

    The government has defended the sharp rise in fuel pump prices even as it avoided using the Petroleum Development Levy to cushion consumers in the wake of an increase in taxes, dealers’ margins and landed cost.

    On Monday, the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) announced the July-August cycle, which saw pump prices for Super Petrol, Diesel and Kerosene increase by Sh8.99 per litre, Sh8.67 per litre and Sh9.65 per litre, respectively.

    A litre of petrol is now retailing at Sh186.31 in Nairobi, diesel (Sh171.58,) while kerosene is going for Sh156.14, up from Sh177.32, Sh162.91 and Sh146.93, respectively.

    EPRA has pegged the increase on the landed cost, which went up in June (whose current pump prices are based on), even as crude prices dropped to $67.73 per barrel, from an average $72.63 in May, and the recent Israel-Iran attacks that affected the global oil market.

    In the latest released prices for July 15- August 24, EPRA considered two cargoes of super petrol, two cargoes of diesel and one cargo of JetA1 fuel.

    All these cargoes were delivered into the country between June 10 and July 9, meaning some cargoes arrived in the country before June 13 when the “Twelve-Day War” started, with minimal impact of crude prices.

    According to EPRA, the average landed cost of imported super petrol increased by 6.45 per cent from $590.24 to $628.30 per cubic metre between May and June 2025.

    That of diesel went up by 6.27 per cent from $580.23 to $616.59 while Kerosene had the highest percentage increase at 6.95 per cent, with its average landed cost going $569 to $608.54 per cubic metre.

    “This really is the reason why we have seen an increase in the pump price on Monday,” EPRA director general Daniel Kiptoo said during the release of the state of the oil industry briefing(Q2 2025) by the Petroleum Institute of East Africa.

    However, a major adjustment in Oil Marketing Companies’ margins and distribution in addition to tax adjustments, have contributed to the jump in pump prices, EPRA’s latest pricing shows.

    OMCs have been awarded a Sh2.15 per litre across the three products, while storage and distribution costs have gone up by Sh0.33 per litre to an average of Sh4.70 per litre.

    This means OMCs are now getting Sh15.24 on a litre of petrol, Sh15.16 on diesel and Sh15.09 on every litre of kerosene sold at the pump.

    There has also been an upward adjustment on Railway Development Levy which has gone up to Sh1.56 per litre on petrol from Sh1.46, that on diesel has increased to Sh1.53 per litre from Sh1.44 while kerose is being charged Sh1.52 up from Sh1.42.

    The Finance Act 2025 has also seen Import Declaration Fee increased to Sh1.94 on a litre of petrol and Sh1.91 on diesel and kerosene from Sh1.80 and Sh1.78, respectively, with taxes and levies forming the bigger component of pump prices of up to Sh82.74 per litre.

    This, as the government continues to squeeze taxpayers to meet its budgetary obligations with nine different taxes being levied on fuel, the highest being the Road Maintenance Levy, which was increased to Sh25 per litre from Sh18.

    Consumers also pay excise duty, VAT, Petroleum Development Levy, Petroleum Regulatory Levy, anti-adulteration levy and merchant shipping levy.

    While there has been concerns that securitisation of the road levy has affected fuel prices, Energy and Petroleum CS Opiyo Wandayi yesterday said otherwise.

    “The only changes as seen in the tables is due to the changes in ad valorem taxes Railway Development Levy and Import Declaration Fee which depend on the Cost Insurance Freight (CIF) of the products,” he said in a statement.

    Treasury CS John Mbadi said there was no urgency in utilising the Petroleum Development Levy, projected to be Sh110 billion in the 2024-25 financial year, to cushion consumers as prices remain relatively fair compared to last two years when they went above the Sh200 mark.

    “PDL is not just about price stabilisation. It is for price stabilisation and in developing the petroleum industry. The government chooses when to intervene and EPRA, my understanding, felt that for now, we don’t have to intervene. Because if you intervene too early, you can deplete that fund,” Mbadi said.

    Meanwhile, EPRA has defended the move to increase OMCs and sector investors’ margins which is part of a five-year cycle to ensure they get returns.

    “For us as a regulator, our mandate is to balance the interests, ensure that consumers are not being exploited and industry obtains a reasonable return on the investments that they do make,” Kiptoo said.

    The Institute of Economic Affairs has since has poked holes on the EPRA formular saying it is getting more expensive.

    “Over the past two years, Kenya’s fuel pricing structure has undergone a series of notable shifts, with each one quietly adding weight to the final pump price,” IEA’s Fiona Okadia says.

  • Kenya’s Betting Shake-Up: Mandatory ID Selfies and Sh50M Capital for Firms Under New BCLB Rules

    Kenya’s Betting Shake-Up: Mandatory ID Selfies and Sh50M Capital for Firms Under New BCLB Rules

    NAIROBI, Kenya, Jul 16 – Kenyans seeking to register for gambling accounts may soon be required to take a selfie holding their national ID, in what regulators say is part of a strategic plan to clean up the fast-growing betting industry.

    The Betting Control and Licensing Board (BCLB) is proposing sweeping reforms to tighten market entry, raise compliance standards, and reduce the number of speculative operators in the country’s gambling sector.

    BCLB Director Peter Mbugi told the National Assembly’s Finance and Planning Committee that the Board is seeking to overhaul current licensing requirements, including raising the minimum capital investment to Sh50 Million for betting firms to weed out unserious entrants.

    “For a small-scale betting shop (Muaka), we are proposing a minimum capital investment of Sh50 million. For public gaming operators such as casinos, the proposal is to raise the requirement to Sh5 billion,” said Mbugi.

    The regulator is also proposing Sh200 million in capital for online betting platforms and national lottery operators, significantly higher than the current financial thresholds.

    This comes as the country continues to battle a rise in gambling addiction, particularly among the youth, fueled by the proliferation of betting firms.

    In 2024 alone, the BCLB licensed over 236 companies, while a further 106 gambling websites were flagged down in the last year by the Board in conjunction with the Communications Authority of Kenya.

    Mbugi said the new measures would help establish order in an industry long plagued by weak oversight, murky ownership structures, and lax technical standards.

    Currently, the application fee for a betting license is Sh10,000, with annual license fees ranging between Sh400,000 and Sh1 million depending on the size of the operator figures lawmakers say are far too low given the risks posed by the sector.

    Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma backed the proposed increase in capital requirements saying gambling shouldn’t propel moral decay.

    “The concern is not just about revenue, but also the public good versus public harm. We need to ensure that gambling is not contributing to societal decay,” Kaluma stated.

    The committee raised scrutiny on Aviator the fast-rising game of chance whose popularity has swept through online betting platforms.

    The game, built on a multiplier model, allows punters to place a bet and watch a plane or animated object ascend as odds increase, with players required to cash out before the object crashes.

    Mbugi explained that Aviator operates on complex algorithms and uses random number generators, making outcomes independent and unpredictable.

    “There is no known trick or formula to predict outcomes. We ensure the algorithms used in these games are vetted before authorization to confirm fairness,” he said.

    While noting that the gameplay is straightforward with gamblers placing bets and cashing out before a crash, Mbugi emphasized the need to regulate both the game mechanics and associated advertising.

    He said currently, no Aviator games are authorized to advertise on TV, radio, or print without explicit approval from the Board.

    To enhance oversight, BCLB is seeking funding to implement a centralized Gaming Monitoring System capable of real-time surveillance of all licensed betting operations in the country. This is to allow better tracking of compliance, revenue, and player protections.

    New user verification protocols are also on the table. One proposal would require new gamblers to upload a picture of themselves holding their national ID, to curb access by minors using parents’ documents.

    Lawmakers expressed concern about the social costs of unregulated gambling, including addiction, poverty, and the normalization of gambling among minors.

    “Some of our frameworks are outdated and can no longer adequately address the evolving industry,” Mbugi stated.

    He pointed to the Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act of 1966 as a law in urgent need of overhaul.

    The proposed Gambling Control Bill aims to anchor these reforms into law and provide a stronger legal foundation for oversight.

    “The Board aspires to create a well-regulated gaming industry that protects the public, promotes responsible gambling, and drives investment and revenue growth,” Mbugi said.

     

  • Devki Boss Narendra Raval Loses Lucrative Mining Deal as Auditor-General Flags Unfair Levy

    Devki Boss Narendra Raval Loses Lucrative Mining Deal as Auditor-General Flags Unfair Levy

    Steel and cement magnate’s preferential mining tariff revoked after audit reveals Sh193 million underpayment

    Billionaire industrialist Narendra Raval has been stripped of a lucrative mining levy concession that saved his cement company millions of shillings, following sustained pressure from the Auditor-General who flagged the arrangement as illegal and unfair to competitors.

    The revocation of the preferential rate by the State Department of Mining marks a significant setback for the Devki Group chairman, whose National Cement Company had been paying a reduced levy of Sh100 per tonne compared to the standard Sh140 rate imposed on rival cement manufacturers.

    Auditor-General Nancy Gathungu revealed in her latest report that the concessionary arrangement, which had been in place since 2020, lacked legal backing and created an uneven playing field in Kenya’s cement industry.

    The audit findings show that between July 2020 and March 2022, Raval’s company underpaid cement levies by Sh193.2 million on 6.19 million tonnes of cement produced.

    “The management submitted that the State Department of Mining issued a revocation for the preferential rate and the company is now paying at the common rate,” Gathungu stated in her July report, confirming the end of what critics had labeled a “sweetheart deal.”

    The controversy stems from a March 2021 letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Mining that authorized National Cement to pay the reduced rate.

    However, Gathungu’s audit revealed that this authorization was issued without any existing regulatory framework to support such concessions.

    “Although a letter from the CS dated 14 March, 2021 provided for audit authorised the company to pay a reduced cement levy rate different from the gazette rate of Sh140 per ton, the letter was not based on any existing regulations as required,” the audit report noted.

    The Royalty Collection and Management Regulations, which would have provided the legal framework for such concessions, were only gazetted in 2024 – three years after Raval’s company began enjoying the preferential treatment.

    Narendra Raval and President Ruto are seen in State House, Nairobi at a past event.
    Narendra Raval and President Ruto are seen in State House, Nairobi at a past event.

    The preferential levy arrangement had drawn sharp criticism from parliamentarians, who in February 2024 adopted a National Assembly report demanding uniform levies across the cement sector.

    The MPs argued that the arrangement gave National Cement an unfair competitive advantage worth approximately Sh10 million monthly.

    Lawmakers had given the government one year to revoke the concession and demanded that Raval’s company reimburse the state for the benefits received during the period of preferential treatment.

    The levy concession was just one element in Raval’s aggressive expansion strategy that has transformed him into one of Kenya’s wealthiest industrialists.

    His National Cement Company, operating under the Simba Cement brand, has emerged as the top player in Kenya’s cement market, overtaking established rivals like East Africa Portland Cement and Bamburi Cement.

    Raval’s empire spans multiple sectors, with recent acquisitions including the Kenyan assets of bankrupt Athi River Mining for Sh5 billion and Rwanda’s oldest cement manufacturer, CIMERWA Plc.

    His company operates cement factories in Emali, Nakuru, and West Pokot counties, with a major Sh30.3 billion clinker plant launched in Kajiado County in 2018.

    Beyond cement, Raval is positioning himself as a major player in steel production, with plans for Kenya’s first virgin steel production facility.

    The Sh45 billion plant in Kwale County, unveiled by President William Ruto in late 2022, will be fed by iron ore from Uganda and represents one of the few such facilities on the continent.

    The proximity to political power has been evident in Raval’s business dealings.

    President Ruto graced the opening of the tycoon’s clinker plant in West Pokot in April 2024, while Raval maintained close ties with former President Uhuru Kenyatta.

    For Raval, whose business empire began with a small steel rolling mill near Athi River in 1992, the loss of the levy concession is unlikely to significantly impact his diversified operations.

    However, it signals a shift toward more transparent and equitable regulatory practices in Kenya’s mining and manufacturing sectors.

  • Fact-Check: MP Ndindi Nyoro Wrong on ‘Secret’ Govt Borrowing Against Fuel Levies

    Fact-Check: MP Ndindi Nyoro Wrong on ‘Secret’ Govt Borrowing Against Fuel Levies

    Kiharu legislator’s allegations of “secret borrowing” misrepresent well-documented infrastructure financing mechanism

    When Kiharu MP Ndindi Nyoro stood before cameras this week claiming the government had engaged in “secret borrowing” of Ksh175 billion against fuel levies, he painted a picture of fiscal skulduggery that would make any taxpayer’s blood boil.

    The only problem?

    His explosive allegations don’t match the documented financial reality.

    A thorough examination of publicly available records reveals that Nyoro’s claims about clandestine government borrowing are fundamentally flawed, representing either a concerning misunderstanding of established financial practices or a deliberate mischaracterization of legitimate infrastructure financing.

    What actually happened wasn’t secret at all.

    The Kenya Roads Board (KRB) employed a standard financial mechanism called securitization to unlock Ksh175 billion for settling contractor debts and reviving 580 stalled road projects across the country.

    Here’s how it worked: KRB took Ksh7 out of every Ksh25 collected from the Road Maintenance Levy Fund and committed this revenue stream to investors through a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV).

    In return, private investors provided the full Ksh175 billion upfront. Think of it as selling future income to get cash today – a practice as old as commerce itself.

    “The KRB has successfully securitized Ksh7 out of every Ksh25 collected from the Road Maintenance Levy Fund,” read an official statement from the board.

    “This move has unlocked KSh175 billion upfront to settle verified contractor arrears and revive over 580 stalled road projects across the country.”

    The paper trail Nyoro apparently missed

    Nyoro’s claim that “Parliament was never consulted” and that “this borrowing is not captured in official debt records” crumbles under scrutiny.

    The securitization process has been extensively documented in public records:

    In March 2025, National Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi publicly announced securing Ksh60 billion in bridge financing from a consortium of banks as part of this very process.

    Multiple media outlets reported on the securitization mechanism throughout June 2025, with detailed explanations appearing in major newspapers.

    Far from being hidden, the process was so transparent that financial analysts wrote lengthy pieces explaining how other government agencies could replicate the model.

    Securitization vs. borrowing

    This is where Nyoro’s critique reveals its fundamental weakness. Securitization isn’t borrowing in the traditional sense – it’s converting future revenue into immediate cash flow.

    The government doesn’t owe money to anyone; private investors simply receive a portion of fuel levy collections over time.

    The key distinction?

    In regular borrowing, the government would be liable if revenues fell short.

    In securitization, that risk transfers to the investors who made the calculation that fuel consumption would remain stable enough to justify their investment.

    “KRB bears no risk of revenue shortfalls – the SPV and its investors assume that risk in exchange for a return on their investment,” explains the financing structure that Nyoro characterizes as dangerous.

    The MP’s assertion that “global oil prices peaked last year, not this year” oversimplifies complex fuel pricing dynamics.

    While global oil prices matter, domestic fuel costs involve currency fluctuations, supply chain logistics, and yes, the very taxes and levies that fund infrastructure development.

    Nyoro correctly identifies that over Ksh80 per liter goes to taxes and levies, but his analysis stops there. He fails to acknowledge that these revenues fund the very road networks that enable economic activity across Kenya.

    More importantly, the securitization model actually reduces future pressure on taxpayers.

    By getting cash upfront, the government avoids having to allocate over Ksh100 billion in the 2025/26 budget to clear old contractor debts.

    That money can now flow to healthcare, education, or debt repayment.

    The securitization model offers several advantages that Nyoro’s critique completely ignores:

    Contractors who have waited years for payment finally get their money, allowing them to restart operations and hire workers.

    The construction sector, which had ground to a halt under the weight of unpaid bills, can resume activity. The government gets immediate relief from a massive liability without increasing public debt.

    “This approach is expected to fast-track payments, restore contractor confidence, and boost economic activity through resumed construction,” KRB noted in its official statement.

    Nyoro’s critique emerges at a particularly convenient moment – as fuel prices bite household budgets and public frustration with the cost of living peaks.

    His apocalyptic warnings about “mortgaging the country’s revenue streams” and setting “dangerous precedents” read more like campaign rhetoric than serious financial analysis.

    The MP warns that future governments might “pledge VAT, PAYE, or even NHIF contributions” using similar mechanisms.

    This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how different revenue streams work and the legal frameworks that govern them.

    Where Nyoro actually has a point

    To be fair, the MP raises legitimate concerns about transparency and public communication.

    Complex financial mechanisms like securitization deserve clearer explanation to help citizens understand how their money is being managed.

    Regular parliamentary briefings on major financial innovations would enhance accountability, even when such measures fall within executive authority.

    The government could do better at explaining why securitization serves the public interest better than traditional borrowing.

    Contrary to Nyoro’s warnings about dangerous precedents, the KRB securitization actually sets a positive example.

    Other government agencies with predictable revenue streams – Kenya Airports Authority, Kenya Ports Authority, Kenya Power – are now exploring similar models to fund infrastructure improvements without straining public finances.

    This represents sophisticated financial management that reduces dependence on external borrowing while delivering immediate benefits to contractors and the broader economy.

    Nyoro’s intervention follows a troubling pattern where complex policy issues get reduced to political soundbites.

    His characterization of established financial practices as “secret” or potentially “unconstitutional” does a disservice to informed public discourse.

    The real question isn’t whether the securitization was appropriate – the evidence clearly shows it was.

    The question is whether Kenya’s political leadership can engage with sophisticated policy challenges without resorting to sensationalism and misrepresentation.

    MP Nyoro’s allegations about secret borrowing and constitutional violations simply don’t hold water when examined against documented facts.

    The KRB securitization represents innovative thinking in public finance, providing immediate relief to contractors while freeing up budgetary resources for other priorities.

    While his concerns about transparency have merit, Nyoro’s characterization of this as fiscal impropriety is fundamentally flawed.

    His critique would carry more weight if it focused on constructive improvements to oversight rather than inflammatory misrepresentations of legitimate financial practices.

    The fuel levy securitization wasn’t a secret scheme to mortgage Kenya’s future – it was a sophisticated solution to a pressing infrastructure funding challenge.

    The real disservice to taxpayers isn’t the securitization itself, but the political rhetoric that obscures public understanding of how modern financial mechanisms can serve the public interest.

    As Kenya grapples with infrastructure funding gaps and fiscal constraints, the country needs leaders who can engage constructively with complex financial innovations, not politicians who prefer to score points through mischaracterization and alarm.

    The KRB securitization deserves scrutiny, debate, and improvement – but it deserves honest analysis, not the kind of political theater that MP Nyoro delivered this week.

  • Fuel Prices Soar As EPRA Announces Sharp Increases in July Review

    Fuel Prices Soar As EPRA Announces Sharp Increases in July Review

    Motorists and households face fresh financial strain as petroleum products jump by up to Ksh9.65 per litre

    Kenyans are bracing for another wave of economic pressure as the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) announced substantial increases in fuel prices effective Monday, July 15, 2025, through August 14, 2025.

    The latest pricing review delivers a harsh blow to consumers already grappling with elevated living costs, with super petrol climbing by Ksh8.99 to retail at Ksh186.31 per litre in Nairobi.

    Diesel prices have increased by Ksh8.67 to Ksh171.58 per litre, while kerosene has recorded the steepest jump of Ksh9.65, now retailing at Ksh156.58 per litre.

    The price surge reflects the reality of Kenya’s heavy dependence on imported refined petroleum products, with EPRA citing elevated average landed costs between May and June 2025 as the primary driver.

    Super petrol’s landed cost jumped 6.45 percent from US$590.24 to US$628.30 per cubic metre, while diesel rose 6.27 percent and kerosene spiked 6.95 percent during the same period.

    “The higher landed costs mirror the sustained global oil rally over the past two months, driven by geopolitical uncertainty and production cuts by major oil-exporting countries,” EPRA stated in its announcement on Monday.

    The regulator emphasized that Kenya’s local fuel prices remain heavily influenced by international market dynamics, with the country’s reliance on imported refined fuel leaving consumers vulnerable to global price volatility.

    The fuel price increases are expected to trigger a cascade of economic consequences across multiple sectors.

    Transportation costs will inevitably rise, potentially pushing up the prices of essential goods and services as businesses pass on increased operational expenses to consumers.

    The timing of the increases is particularly challenging for households already dealing with inflationary pressures.

    With Kenya’s inflation rate standing at 3.80 percent in June, the fuel price hikes threaten to add further strain to family budgets and could potentially drive inflation higher in the coming months.

    Food prices, in particular, are likely to feel the impact as fuel costs represent a significant component of transportation and production expenses for agricultural products.

    Historical data shows that fuel price increases in Kenya typically translate to higher costs for essential commodities within weeks of implementation.

    The fuel price increases will affect different regions across Kenya, with variations based on transportation costs to different distribution centers.

    In Mombasa, super petrol, diesel, and kerosene will retail at Ksh174.01, Ksh159.62 and Ksh143.64 per litre respectively, while in Kisumu, prices were set at Ksh177.28, Ksh163.23 and Ksh147.30 per litre.

    EPRA maintains that it operates within a legally defined pricing formula designed to protect consumers while ensuring industry sustainability.

    The regulator has directed consumers to review detailed retail and wholesale prices for various towns and depots through annexes available on its official website and communication channels.

    The fuel price increases come at a time when the government is under pressure to address the rising cost of living, which has become a significant concern for ordinary Kenyans.

    The latest hikes are likely to intensify public discourse around fuel subsidies and the need for alternative energy solutions to reduce the country’s dependence on imported petroleum products.

    As Kenya continues to grapple with global economic uncertainties, the fuel price increases underscore the interconnected nature of international markets and local economic conditions.

    The full impact of these price changes will become clearer in the coming weeks as businesses and consumers adjust to the new cost structure.

    For motorists and households, the immediate focus will be on budget adjustments and potentially seeking more fuel-efficient alternatives as the country navigates another period of increased energy costs.

    The fuel price increases take effect from Monday, July 15, 2025, and will remain in place until August 14, 2025, when EPRA will conduct its next monthly review.

  • CMA Ordered to Pay Sh7.5 Million After Damaging Report Costs Investment Executive Prime Job

    CMA Ordered to Pay Sh7.5 Million After Damaging Report Costs Investment Executive Prime Job

    High Court rules regulator violated due process by sharing unverified allegations with prospective employer

    The Capital Markets Authority (CMA) has been dealt a costly blow after the High Court ordered it to pay former Sanlam Investments CEO Kennedy Riungu Sh7.5 million in damages for prejudicing his career prospects through reckless administrative conduct.

    Justice Lawrence Mugambi delivered a scathing judgment against the financial regulator, finding that it violated Mr Riungu’s constitutional right to fair administrative action by secretly sharing damaging and unverified information about him with his prospective employer, Genghis Capital Investment Limited, in 2018.

    The case exposes troubling gaps in CMA’s procedural safeguards and raises serious questions about how Kenya’s financial watchdog handles sensitive employment assessments that can make or break careers in the investment industry.

    The damaging report

    At the heart of the controversy was CMA’s decision to inform Genghis Capital in January 2019 that Mr Riungu was under investigation, effectively torpedoing his chances of securing a fund manager position with the investment firm.

    The regulator took this action despite having no concrete evidence of wrongdoing and without giving Mr Riungu an opportunity to respond to the allegations.

    Justice Mugambi found that when CMA wrote to Genghis Capital, it had only just met with Sanlam executives who were themselves still conducting forensic investigations and had yet to file a formal complaint.

    “Even when the CMA wrote to Sanlam on October 4, 2018, Sanlam responded by stating that it was still carrying out forensic investigations,” the judge noted.

    The timing reveals a regulator acting on incomplete information while wielding the power to destroy careers.

    Mr Riungu had applied for a mandatory ‘fit and proper’ assessment through his new employer in line with regulatory requirements, but instead of conducting an objective evaluation, CMA chose to share preliminary and unsubstantiated concerns.

    The court found that CMA’s actions contravened Section 24A(3) of the Capital Markets Authority Act, which requires the regulator to give individuals an opportunity to be heard before determining their fitness for employment in the financial sector.

    This fundamental principle of natural justice was entirely bypassed.

    “The CMA acted with lack of concern for potential consequences in regard to the risk or impact of its decision at a very early stage in the process and put the petitioner in a very prejudicial position,” Justice Mugambi ruled.

    The judge was particularly critical of CMA’s claim that it had no control over how Genghis would use the information.

    “The CMA was simply reckless and malicious and never bothered to consider potential harmful effect of its actions when no proper complaint had been properly laid before it at the time,” he stated.

    Career destruction

    The consequences for Mr Riungu were immediate and devastating.

    Having left his position at Sanlam Investment Limited in December 2017 to join Genghis Capital, he found himself in professional limbo when CMA’s confidential letter forced him to vacate his acting CEO position to avoid regulatory non-compliance.

    The court heard that it took CMA eight months from receiving Sanlam’s complaint to invite Mr Riungu to defend himself, yet the regulator was swift to notify his prospective employer about the investigations.

    This disparity in treatment raised serious questions about CMA’s priorities and competence.

    Mr Riungu’s ordeal didn’t end there. When he applied for another ‘fit and proper’ assessment with Mayfair Asset Managers Limited in March 2022, he faced the same dilatory treatment from CMA.

    It wasn’t until July 2020 that the regulator finally issued him with a show cause notice regarding allegations of misrepresenting investments made by Sanlam Investment Ltd.

    Mr Riungu initially sought Sh45.9 million in compensation for lost income from missed employment opportunities.

    While the court awarded a more modest Sh7.5 million, the judgment represents a significant victory for due process rights in Kenya’s financial sector.

    The case highlights the enormous power wielded by regulatory bodies and the devastating impact their decisions can have on individual careers.

    In an industry where reputation is everything, CMA’s reckless sharing of unverified information essentially blacklisted a senior executive from the investment management sector.

    This judgment should serve as a wake-up call for CMA and other regulatory bodies about the need for robust procedural safeguards when handling employment assessments.

    The ‘fit and proper’ process is designed to maintain standards in the financial sector, but it must be conducted fairly and transparently.

    The case also raises broader questions about accountability in Kenya’s regulatory framework.

    How many other careers have been damaged by similar regulatory overreach?

    What measures are in place to prevent such violations of due process?

    Justice Mugambi’s ruling sends a clear message that regulatory bodies cannot hide behind their statutory powers when they fail to follow basic principles of natural justice.

    The Sh7.5 million award, while significant, pales in comparison to the career damage inflicted on Mr Riungu and serves as a reminder that regulatory power must be exercised responsibly.

    For Kenya’s financial sector to maintain credibility and attract top talent, regulatory bodies must demonstrate that they can be trusted to act fairly and transparently.

    The CMA’s handling of the Riungu case falls far short of these standards and demands immediate reform of its procedures.

  • Why You’re Paying More But Getting Fewer Units; Kenya Power’s Tokens System Explained

    Why You’re Paying More But Getting Fewer Units; Kenya Power’s Tokens System Explained

    If you’ve noticed your electricity tokens buying fewer units despite paying the same amount, you’re not alone.

    The answer lies in Kenya Power’s tiered tariff system that many consumers don’t fully understand.

    Kenya Power categorizes domestic customers into three main tariff groups based on their monthly consumption patterns, with rates increasing as usage rises.

    This progressive pricing structure means heavy users subsidize lower consumption households, but it also creates confusion when customers cross between categories.

    The Three-Tier System

    The utility company operates what it calls a “lifeline tariff” for its lowest consumers.

    Households using below 30 units monthly qualify for Domestic 1 status, paying just Ksh 12.23 per unit before taxes and levies.

    This subsidized rate aims to keep electricity accessible for Kenya’s most vulnerable households.

    Move beyond 30 units but stay under 100 units monthly, and you’re automatically shifted to Domestic 2 tariff at Ksh 16.45 per unit. Cross the 100-unit threshold, and Domestic 3 kicks in at Ksh 19.02 per unit for consumption up to 15,000 units monthly.

    The Three-Month Average Trap

    Here’s where many consumers get caught off guard: Kenya Power doesn’t determine your tariff category based on a single month’s usage. Instead, the company calculates your average consumption over three consecutive months to assign your tariff band.

    This means a customer who used 25 units in January, 35 units in February, and 40 units in March would be classified under Domestic 2 despite never using more than 40 units in any single month.

    Their three-month average of 33.3 units pushes them above the 30-unit lifeline threshold.

    The rate differences create significant cost variations.

    A customer buying 50 units worth of electricity would pay approximately Ksh 611 under Domestic 1 rates, but Ksh 822 under Domestic 2 – a difference of over Ksh 200 for the same amount of power.

    This tiered system explains why the same monetary amount buys fewer units as consumption patterns change.

    A household that previously enjoyed lifeline rates might find their purchasing power reduced after crossing usage thresholds, even temporarily.

    Understanding these tariff boundaries allows consumers to make strategic decisions about their power usage.

    Households hovering near the 30-unit threshold might benefit from energy conservation measures to maintain lifeline status, while those already in higher tiers face less marginal cost pressure for additional consumption within their band.

    Kenya Power’s progressive tariff structure serves social policy goals by subsidizing basic electricity access, but the three-month averaging system means consumers can face unexpected rate increases based on historical rather than current usage patterns.

    For households looking to optimize their electricity costs, monitoring monthly consumption and understanding how the averaging system works becomes crucial for budget planning and energy management decisions.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​