Tag: DP World

  • Epstein’s Girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell Frequently Visited Kenya As Files Reveal Local Secret Links With The Underage Sex Trafficking Ring

    Epstein’s Girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell Frequently Visited Kenya As Files Reveal Local Secret Links With The Underage Sex Trafficking Ring

    Nairobi, Kenya — Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite serving 20 years in prison for sex trafficking minors alongside billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, was a regular visitor to Kenya, newly unsealed court documents have revealed in a bombshell expose that has sent shockwaves through the country’s elite circles.

    The damning files, released following civil litigation against Maxwell, paint a disturbing picture of how Kenya became entangled in one of the world’s most notorious sex trafficking operations, with the East African nation featured prominently in Epstein’s private address book and identified as a key destination in his global network of abuse.

    Maxwell, daughter of the late Robert Maxwell who owned a 45 percent stake in the now-defunct Kenya Times newspaper through a joint venture with KANU, leveraged her family’s Kenyan connections to establish a foothold in the country that prosecutors say facilitated her criminal enterprise.

    The secret address book recovered from Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion contains multiple Kenyan contacts, including the prestigious Muthaiga Club in Nairobi and Italian-born Kenyan conservationist Kuki Gallmann.

    While appearing in the address book does not necessarily implicate individuals in criminal activity, investigators say it demonstrates the sprawling reach of Epstein’s network across continents.

    Court documents reveal that Kenya was specifically listed as a leading sex tourism destination alongside Thailand, Brazil, Sri Lanka, and Costa Rica in materials found in Epstein’s possession.

    The designation raises troubling questions about why the convicted sex offender maintained such keen interest in the country.

    In a particularly chilling example, emails presented as evidence show how Epstein in 2009 orchestrated plans to send two teenage girls to Kenya under the guise of an equestrian safari and wildlife conservation internships. The elaborate scheme involved properties at Borana, Ol Malo, Cottars, and Ol Donyo Wuas, with Epstein insisting the girls send him photographs during their stay.

    The proposed trip followed Epstein’s established pattern of grooming vulnerable minors by offering career support and exotic travel opportunities.

    When one of the intended victims showed reluctance about the Kenya excursion, Epstein sent angry emails berating her, demonstrating the psychological manipulation central to his criminal operation.

    “Hey Jeff, I am thrilled beyond belief to be going on this trip to Kenya. Please don’t think I’m not,” the frightened teenager wrote back, desperately trying to appease the billionaire predator who had promised to support her music career. Epstein’s cold response came swiftly: “So, for the future, I don’t care what you do, it’s your life, but don’t lie or bullshit me.”

    Ultimately, one girl withdrew from the trip, but Hollywood publicist Peggy Siegal and her niece travelled to Kenya in December 2009, landing at a camp in Maasai Mara where they encountered members of the Ralph Lauren family also on holiday.

    The coincidence underscores how Kenya’s luxury safari industry became unwittingly intertwined with Epstein’s web of exploitation.

    Maxwell’s frequent visits to Kenya take on sinister new meaning in light of her June 2022 conviction for grooming underage victims across multiple locations over a decade-long period.

    Prosecutors established that Maxwell and Epstein systematically targeted school students aspiring to careers in modelling or the arts, promising mentorship while delivering abuse.

    The Kenya connection runs deeper through Maxwell’s family history. Her father, British media mogul Robert Maxwell, acquired his stake in Kenya Times in 1988, the same year some sources claim he introduced his daughter to Epstein.

    Others suggest the pair met through mutual friends, but the timing of the business venture and their relationship remains striking.

    Robert Maxwell’s mysterious death in 1991, when his naked body was found in the Atlantic Ocean, triggered the collapse of his publishing empire.

    While an inquest ruled heart attack and accidental drowning, Epstein himself claimed in emails that Maxwell was killed after attempting to blackmail Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, adding another layer of intrigue to the family’s murky dealings.

    Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell
    Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell

    The newly released documents expose how international power brokers sought to exploit Epstein’s interest in Kenya for business opportunities.

    Boris Nikolic, then advisor to Bill Gates, suggested investing in mobile money platforms and offered to introduce Epstein to the inventor of M-Pesa. Ernest Unik, an events organiser who runs the Haiti-based children’s charity Edeyo, shared contacts including a State House official serving as an aide to then President Uhuru Kenyatta.

    Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, CEO of Dubai logistics giant DP World, went further, offering to connect Epstein directly with the Kenyan president.

    As proof of his access, he emailed Epstein a photograph with then Foreign Affairs Minister Amina Mohammed, writing: “With Mrs. Amina president cabinate minister of Kenya.”

    Perhaps most disturbing is the revelation that a senior United Nations official based in Nairobi cultivated a relationship with Epstein that raised serious ethical questions.

    Lisa Svensson, who served as marine chief at the United Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, exchanged flirtatious messages with the convicted sex offender from 2012 onwards.

    In October 2016, as a lawsuit accusing Epstein and Donald Trump of abusing a minor was filed in New York, Svensson invited Epstein to visit her in Kenya. “Gave up on Swedish men, moved to Kenya. Wish me good luck. Come and visit,” she wrote.

    Days later, with the US presidential election approaching, she advised the registered sex offender: “If any president candidates win, you need to evacuate.”

    Internal UN correspondence shows Svensson disappeared from her Nairobi workstation under unclear circumstances around this time, working remotely from Europe instead.

    A 2018 complaint to UNEP Executive Director Erik Solheim read: “You, Sir, have approved that your friend, Lisa Svensson can work from Europe, because for personal reasons she does not wish to work in Nairobi. Her big office in Nairobi remains vacant.”

    Solheim himself was forced to resign later that year for breaking internal rules.

    When Epstein was arrested in July 2019 for sex trafficking of minors, Svensson quietly left her UNEP position, raising questions about whether her departure was connected to her association with the disgraced financier. Epstein died by suicide in his prison cell one month after his arrest.

    The revelations confirm Kenya’s troubling status as what investigators describe as a playground for international wheeler-dealers, a secluded hideout for billionaires and celebrities, and crucially, a transit or destination country for sex trafficking operations.

    Separate documents link Kenya and Tanzania to an alleged trafficking network, with children from Ethiopia, South Sudan, Sudan, Somalia and other parts of Eastern Africa reportedly trafficked through Mombasa port.

    The convergence of luxury tourism infrastructure, weak regulatory oversight, and powerful international connections created conditions that predators like Epstein and Maxwell exploited.

    Kenyan authorities have yet to issue an official statement addressing the damning revelations or indicating whether local investigations will be launched into the activities described in the court documents.

    Legal experts say the statute of limitations and jurisdictional complexities may complicate any potential prosecutions, but victims’ advocates are demanding accountability.

    “These files expose Kenya as more than just a picturesque safari destination in Epstein’s world. It was a deliberate choice, a place where powerful people believed they could operate with impunity,” said one international trafficking expert who requested anonymity.

    “The question now is whether Kenyan authorities will take seriously their obligation to investigate and prevent such exploitation on their soil.”

    The Maxwell family’s business interests in Kenya, combined with Ghislaine’s regular visits and Epstein’s cultivation of high-level contacts, paint a picture of systematic relationship-building that went far beyond casual tourism.

    These were calculated moves by sophisticated criminals who understood how to leverage social capital and geographic distance to further their predatory aims.

    As more documents continue to emerge from ongoing litigation, the full extent of Kenya’s entanglement in the Epstein-Maxwell trafficking network remains to be seen.

    What is already clear is that the country’s reputation as a premier destination has been irrevocably tainted by its association with two of the world’s most reviled sex offenders.

    For the young women and girls who were targeted, groomed, and in many cases abused, Kenya represents not adventure and wildlife, but rather another location where their trauma unfolded.

    The luxury lodges and exclusive clubs that dot the landscape now carry the shadow of having potentially facilitated one of history’s most extensive child exploitation operations.

    The international community watches as Kenya grapples with its unwitting role in this global scandal, wondering whether the revelations will spur meaningful reform in how the country monitors and regulates the movements of high-risk individuals, or whether the powerful connections exposed in these files will ensure that uncomfortable questions remain unanswered.

  • Epstein Files: Sultan bin Sulayem Bragged on His Closeness to President Uhuru Then His Firm DP World Controversially Won Port Construction in Kenya, Tanzania

    Epstein Files: Sultan bin Sulayem Bragged on His Closeness to President Uhuru Then His Firm DP World Controversially Won Port Construction in Kenya, Tanzania

    The release of over 3.5 million pages of documents related to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein has exposed a troubling pattern linking Dubai’s logistics titan DP World to the disgraced financier through its chairman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, raising uncomfortable questions about how the company secured lucrative port deals across East Africa just months after Sulayem boasted to Epstein about his access to African presidents.

    The documents reveal that in April 2013, Sulayem emailed Epstein to inform him he was attending the inauguration of then President Uhuru Kenyatta, writing, “I am in Nairobi for the inauguration of Uhuru Kenyatta as president of Kenya, whom I know very well.” Epstein replied three hours later asking, “Any plans for NY?” The casual exchange suggests a relationship where access to heads of state was currency worth trading.

    Just over a year later, in October 2014, Sulayem updated Epstein about a three-hour meeting he had with President Kenyatta in Mombasa.

    The discussion centred on plans to build what Sulayem described as a massive logistics hub to serve Kenya, South Sudan, Uganda, the Central African Republic and Rwanda.

    Former President Uhuru Kenyatta.
    Former President Uhuru Kenyatta.

    Within months of these communications, DP World began aggressive expansion across East Africa, securing deals that critics say lacked transparency and proper public participation.

    The timing raises troubling questions.

    In March 2022, Kenya’s Finance Ministry entered into a controversial concession with DP World, giving the Dubai-based firm rights to operate berths at Mombasa, Lamu and Kisumu ports.

    The deal, which emerged after President Kenyatta’s February 2022 visit to the UAE, sparked fierce political backlash.

    Kenya Kwanza Coalition leaders accused Kenyatta of secretly auctioning national assets, with claims the agreement was sealed during what was publicly billed as opposition leader Raila Odinga’s birthday party in Mombasa.

    The letter requesting DP World’s proposal was addressed directly to Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, the same man who had spent years cultivating a relationship with one of history’s most notorious paedophiles.

    Although the Kenya deal ultimately collapsed amid election-year politics, DP World’s appetite for East African ports did not wane.

    In October 2023, DP World signed a 30-year concession to operate four berths at Tanzania’s Dar es Salaam Port, committing an initial $250 million that could grow to $1 billion.

    Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem himself described the agreement as “a milestone in enhancing the supply chain infrastructure in East Africa.”

    The deal, which took effect in April 2024, grants DP World control over one of the continent’s busiest maritime gateways, handling cargo for Tanzania and landlocked neighbours including Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Malawi, DRC and Zambia.

    The Epstein files paint a disturbing portrait of Sulayem’s character and his relationship with the convicted sex offender.

    Between 2007 and 2018, the two exchanged what investigators describe as “dozens, if not hundreds” of emails covering everything from business matters to deeply personal exchanges.

    Photos released by House Democrats show Epstein cooking with Sulayem, suggesting an intimacy that went far beyond professional acquaintance.

    In one particularly chilling exchange from 2017, Sulayem helped arrange for a Russian “masseuse” from Epstein’s “private spa” to train at the Rixos hotel in Antalya, Turkey, so she could “gain better experiences.”

    Epstein wrote that he wanted her to “learn as much as she can, all treatments etc.” During Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2022 trial, multiple witnesses testified that Epstein used the guise of “massages” to sexually exploit young girls at his properties.

    The masseuse’s passport details were redacted in the DoJ files, her age unknown.

    Other emails reveal Sulayem repeatedly asking Epstein if he could visit his private island, Little St. James, where victims testified they were trafficked and abused.

    “Dear Jeffery, Any update on the Christmas at your island I need to plan my travel,” Sulayem wrote in December 2014. This was years after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.

    In August 2015, Sulayem sent Epstein a link to a pornography website during a series of text messages.

    In another 2016 exchange, Epstein wrote to Sulayem: “no girl in dubai is safe tonite.” The context remains unclear, but the casual depravity is unmistakable.

    The relationship extended to political access. In January 2017, days before Donald Trump’s first inauguration, Sulayem asked Epstein whether he should attend and “Do you think it will be possible to shake hand with trump?” Epstein advised him on the matter.

    In 2015, Sulayem asked Epstein to introduce him to Elon Musk to discuss using Tesla batteries for a Dubai hotel project. Two years later, Musk and Sulayem led a discussion in Dubai.

    Epstein also facilitated Sulayem’s attempts to recruit British politician Lord Peter Mandelson to DP World’s board in 2014.

    Mandelson, who served in Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s cabinets and later became Donald Trump’s ambassador to Washington before being sacked over his Epstein ties, initially agreed before raising concerns about DP World’s parent company, Dubai World, being “overleveraged.” Epstein reassured him it was “awash in cash flow.”

    Investigative reporting also reveals that Epstein used Sulayem’s name as a front to purchase Great St. James, an island near Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

    Documents made it appear that Sulayem was the buyer paying roughly $22.5 million, when in reality the beneficial owner was Epstein himself.

    This arrangement allowed Epstein to mask his expanding island empire behind the credibility of a wealthy Gulf businessman.

    The Africa connection runs deeper than Kenya and Tanzania.

    DP World now operates ports and logistics centres across at least nine African countries, including Algeria, Angola, Djibouti, Egypt, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal and South Africa, as well as the breakaway region of Somaliland.

    The company’s expansion has been marked by long-term concessions, often spanning 20 to 30 years, granting DP World extraordinary control over critical trade infrastructure.

    In Senegal, DP World is constructing a $1.1 billion deepwater port at Ndayane, 50 kilometres south of Dakar, which it will control for 25 years.

    In Angola, the company secured a 20-year concession for the multipurpose terminal at Luanda port.

    In the Democratic Republic of Congo, DP World is developing a $1.2 billion deep-sea port at Banana, expected to be completed by 2025. In Mozambique, DP World operates the Maputo container terminal and launched the first dedicated container train service to Zimbabwe.

    The pattern is consistent: DP World arrives in African nations promising modernisation and investment, secures decades-long concessions over strategic assets, and tightens Dubai’s grip on continental trade routes.

    The company’s expansion aligns with broader UAE geopolitical strategy, with sister firm AD Ports Group similarly expanding across Tanzania, Congo and Egypt.

    Yet DP World’s Africa ventures have been plagued by controversy.

    In Djibouti, the government nationalised the Doraleh Container Terminal in 2018, terminating DP World’s 30-year concession amid accusations of unfair contract terms.

    The move escalated into a bitter legal battle, with a Hong Kong appeals court ordering Djibouti to pay DP World over $600 million in damages. The crisis deepened after the UAE signed a deal to upgrade Somaliland’s Berbera port, positioning a rival facility on Djibouti’s doorstep.

    In Tanzania, the DP World concession sparked fierce opposition from activists, religious leaders and opposition politicians who warned it threatened national sovereignty.

    “The agreement was shocking as it entailed clauses that were blatantly one-sided in favour of the Dubai government and its state-owned enterprise Dubai Port World,” activist Maria Tsehai told The Africa Report in 2023. President Samia Suluhu Hassan pushed the deal through despite the backlash.

    The Epstein files also reveal discussions between Sulayem and the sex offender about exploiting Somaliland’s economic potential.

    In April 2018, Sulayem sent Epstein a document titled “The recognition of Somaliland – a brief history.” Earlier emails from associates explored water exports from Berbera and financial services opportunities, with one sender noting the potential to profit from remittance services if Barclays halted money transfers to the region.

    Other African locations appear in the Epstein files in more sinister contexts.

    The documents reference Kenya and Somalia as locations flagged for paedophile activity, with Tanzania and Senegal identified as transit points in alleged trafficking operations.

    Coastal towns like Malindi in Kenya are described as areas frequented by individuals involved in such activity.

    Luxury destinations such as Mnemba Island in Tanzania were reportedly visited by members of Epstein’s circle.

    Newly released emails detail planning for 2009 trips to Kenya involving young women.

    In one exchange, American publicist Peggy Siegal joked to Epstein about travelling from Amsterdam: “If the Maasai warriors don’t eat us, the pirates from Somalia will.”

    Between April and June 2009, correspondence shows Epstein and Siegal discussed transporting two girls to Kenya, with Epstein pledging $13,000 per girl for “safari and internship.” He referenced his knowledge of accommodation flexibility at venues Siegal had chosen.

    In May 2011, Siegal emailed that a girl, whose name was redacted, “is finally turning legal.” Earlier that month she told Epstein the girls were “kissing the ground you walk on and the African plains the girls are about to ride on.”

    In one excerpt presented as a “joke,” a sender wrote to Epstein about “bringing a little baby back… or two… boys or girls” from Kenya.

    The documents allege that Epstein’s estate was in the process of opening a film studio in Somaliland, possibly to lure young actors into his network.

    He reportedly wanted to establish a commercial bank in Somalia.

    Files suggest some non-governmental organisations and modelling agencies in Africa facilitated or participated in activities consistent with human trafficking.

    Children from Ethiopia, South Sudan, Sudan, Somalia and other parts of Eastern Africa were reportedly trafficked through Mombasa, the very port where DP World sought control and where Sulayem met with President Kenyatta to discuss regional logistics infrastructure.

    Experts caution that mention of countries in the Epstein documents does not constitute proof of wrongdoing by government officials. No evidence directly links President Kenyatta or other African leaders to Epstein’s crimes. Being photographed with Epstein at public events or appearing in correspondence does not imply criminal involvement.

    President Kenyatta’s connection to the files stems entirely from Sulayem’s emails about attending his inauguration and discussing port development.

    Similarly, there is no public record that Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem has been charged with or formally investigated for Epstein’s crimes.

    DP World declined to comment on the revelations.

    Yet the company’s chairman maintained a close personal friendship with a convicted paedophile for over a decade, exchanged hundreds of emails with him, facilitated his masseuse’s training, sought invitations to his private island where abuse occurred, and shared pornographic content with him, all while leveraging Epstein’s network to access political power and business opportunities.

    The question now facing East African governments is whether they conducted adequate due diligence before handing control of strategic national assets to a company led by a man so deeply enmeshed with Jeffrey Epstein.

    Did Kenyan and Tanzanian officials know about Sulayem’s relationship with the convicted sex offender when they negotiated port concessions? Were background checks conducted? What safeguards exist to prevent individuals with such associations from gaining control over critical infrastructure?

    In Kenya, the DP World deal collapsed amid political opposition, though speculation persists that the company may re-emerge as a contender as the government quietly relaunches port concessions.

    In Tanzania, DP World is already operational, with the government touting reduced ship turnaround times and increased revenue while critics warn of sovereignty erosion.

    DP World now controls a vast network of African ports stretching from the Red Sea to the Atlantic, from Djibouti and Somaliland down through Mozambique and across to Senegal and Angola.

    The company, ultimately owned by Dubai’s ruling family through Dubai World and chaired by the emirate’s ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, wields enormous influence over continental trade flows.

    Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, born into one of Dubai’s most prominent political families and positioned since birth with access to the UAE’s ruling elite, has built an empire by securing long-term concessions over strategic infrastructure in developing nations.

    His relationship with Jeffrey Epstein suggests he was willing to maintain close personal ties with a known sex offender, facilitate the training of women from Epstein’s “private spa,” and seek invitations to an island where children were abused, all while presenting himself as a legitimate businessman worthy of trust from African governments.

    The Epstein files have exposed more than a paedophile’s network.

    They have revealed the casual intermingling of wealth, political access and depravity at the highest levels of global commerce.

    They have shown how men like Sulayem leveraged relationships with criminals to enhance their own power and reach.

    And they have raised urgent questions about how such individuals were granted control over East Africa’s maritime gateways while their character remained unexamined.

    As Kenya contemplates relaunching its port concessions and Tanzania deepens its partnership with DP World, the shadow of Jeffrey Epstein looms over every contract, every promise of investment, every assurance of modernisation.

    The documents released by the US Department of Justice force a reckoning: are African nations so desperate for foreign investment that they will hand strategic assets to companies led by men who counted paedophiles among their closest friends?

    The ports of Mombasa, Dar es Salaam, Lamu and others are more than economic infrastructure.

    They are gateways to the continent, arteries through which trade flows, symbols of sovereignty and development.

    The decision of whom to entrust with their operation cannot be made lightly, cannot ignore character, cannot overlook associations that speak to judgment and values.

    Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem may never be charged with a crime. DP World may deliver on its promises of efficiency and investment.

    But the Epstein files have permanently stained both, raising questions that demand answers before any government hands this company control over another inch of African soil.

  • Kenya Quietly Relaunches Mombasa, Lamu Port Concessions Amid DP World Speculation

    Kenya Quietly Relaunches Mombasa, Lamu Port Concessions Amid DP World Speculation

    Kenya has discreetly revived its plan to concession the management of the strategic ports of Mombasa and Lamu, following the suspension of a tender call in November 2023.

    The Kenya Ports Authority (KPA), with approval from the Treasury, is now advancing a 30-year public-private partnership (PPP) model, with negotiations unfolding behind closed doors, raising speculation about the involvement of Dubai-based logistics giant DP World.

    The relaunched project departs from its original structure, which envisioned a single operator managing all port assets. Instead, the KPA is now leaning toward splitting the concessions across multiple partners.

    The assets in question include berths 11 to 14 and container terminal number 1 in Mombasa, as well as berths 1 to 3 and the special economic zone in Lamu.

    This shift has drawn keen interest from international players, particularly Kenya’s long-standing Japanese and Chinese partners, while DP World remains a focal point of speculation.

    Under the Kenyan 2022 PPP Act, the government can bypass competitive bidding for strategic infrastructure if competition is deemed insufficient.

    In March, the Treasury advertised for a transaction advisory consultant to guide the development of KPA’s port assets, hinting at a potential preference for direct procurement.

    This move has fueled speculation that DP World, a frontrunner in the previous tender, could re-emerge as a leading contender.

    However, the Dubai firm, which secured the Dar es Salaam port concession in 2023, has remained silent and has not yet submitted an offer, according to Treasury sources.

    Global Interests Collide

    The port concessions have attracted significant international attention, with Japan and China asserting their stakes.

    The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which financed Mombasa’s container terminal with a $264 million loan in 2015 and the Dongo Kundu special economic zone with $348 million in 2020, has urged Kenyan authorities to safeguard its interests.

    Japan is also eyeing participation in a third phase of Mombasa’s port expansion, as the facility nears its capacity limits.

    Meanwhile, China Communications Construction Co., which built Lamu port in 2014, recently secured a contract to construct Mombasa’s berth 19B.

    Both nations have expressed reservations about awarding all concessions to a single operator like DP World, advocating for a diversified allocation of assets.

    The port of Mombasa, which handled 41 million tonnes of goods in 2024, serves as East Africa’s primary commercial gateway, facilitating trade for Kenya and landlocked neighbors like Uganda.

    The high stakes of the concessions have placed President William Ruto in a delicate position as he navigates domestic and international pressures.

    Ruto’s Balancing Act

    The Treasury and Kenya’s debt restructuring committee have cautioned Ruto against offering overly favorable terms to DP World, citing fiscal prudence.

    Ruto, who has previously negotiated major infrastructure deals with the United Arab Emirates, including a now-canceled $2 billion concession for Jomo Kenyatta International Airport to India’s Adani Group, is treading carefully.

    The Adani deal, scrapped in November 2024 after public outcry and allegations of opaque dealings, strained Kenya’s relations with the UAE, forcing Ruto to travel to Abu Dhabi to mend ties.

    As Kenya restructures its approach to the port concessions, the government faces the challenge of balancing transparency, international partnerships, and economic imperatives.

    With the KPA and DP World yet to comment, the relaunch of the Mombasa and Lamu port concessions remains shrouded in intrigue, with the region’s trade future hanging in the balance.

  • DP World’s Past Port Operation Deals Makes It A Risky Gamble

    DP World’s Past Port Operation Deals Makes It A Risky Gamble

    In the recent past, atleast 22 people have been threatened or detained for criticising a deal between Tanzania and Dubai that covers the management of a Tanzanian port by Emirati logistics company DP World, according to Human Rights Watch.

    Amnesty International said a number of dissents have been detained after speaking out publicly against the ports deal signed last October by President Samia Suluhu Hassan.

    The agreement paves the way for DP World, a logistics company controlled by the emirate of Dubai in the UAE, to manage all the ports in Tanzania in consultation with the government.

    The agreement was signed after a visit to Dubai by Tanzania’s president Samia Suluhu Hassan at which 37 memoranda of understanding were concluded. Hassan has sought to portray Tanzania as open for investment since becoming president in 2021 following the death of John Magufuli. It was ratified by parliament in June.

    Critics of the deal say it poses a threat to Tanzanian sovereignty and security,

    The agreement contained several unusual clauses that weakened Tanzania’s ability to change laws, annul contracts or seek competitive bids, said lawyers.

    Clauses that have raised concern include one that prevents withdrawal from the deal “in any circumstances, including in the event of material breach, fundamental change of circumstances, severance of diplomatic or consular relations”.

    However, the government has defended the accord, arguing that it will improve efficiency, cut costs and increase revenues.

    “The Tanzanian authorities’ crackdown of critics of the UAE port deal reveals their growing intolerance to dissent,” Amnesty’s east and southern Africa director, Tigere Chagutah, said.

    The accused could face treason charges — a non-bailable offence that carries a death penalty — Amnesty said, citing the defence lawyers.

    President Samia Suluhu Hassan.

    Hassan came to power in March 2021 after the sudden death of her autocratic predecessor John Magufuli.

    Although she has reversed some of Magufuli’s most controversial policies, critics labelled her a “dictator” after Freeman Mbowe, leader of the Chadema opposition party, was arrested on terrorism charges in July 2021 before being released.

    Chadema is among those opposing the deal, which gives DP World exclusive rights for a period of 12 months to negotiate with the government on how best to manage the country’s 80 ports.

    Kenya Deal

    Dubai Port World, the UAE-based firm is also seeking to develop, operate and manage four Kenyan ports, has a controversial record.

    In February, 2006, an announcement by DP World that it was taking over management of six US ports in a $3.7 billion (Sh436 billion) deal kicked up controversy in Congress, mainly on security considerations. Under pressure and public scrutiny, Dubai Ports dropped the deal.

    In 2012, Djibouti filed an arbitration case in London against DP World, claiming that the firm bribed an official to secure concession to run Dolareh – the largest container terminal in Africa.

    Though Djibouti lost, the case revealed insights into dealings between corrupt elites and global concession operators.

    Former Treasury CS Ukur Yatani had invited DP World during the past regime of President Uhuru Kenyatta to submit commercial proposals for four projects. They include deploying its money to build three berths at Mombasa port, develop cold storage supply chains in Kisumu and Naivasha and to build a special economic zone in Lamu.

    Treasury had also extended an invitation to submit a commercial proposal to equip and operate the three completed berths in Lamu.

    By stating that the government has signed a contract to sell three ports to DP World, Kenya Kwanza leaders got it wrong. What is on the table is an offer to an investor to develop a project, and not sell the ports.

    Questions, however, arose. Why is the government of the day was offering such sweet deals to DP World? Were procurement regulations breached?

    Mr Yatani ought to have prepared a prospectus for these projects and put it out there for investors to come up with expressions of interest.

    The flip side of this, however, is that having prior  introduced an amendment to the PPP Act that allows investors to present and engage the government on unsolicited project proposals and without subjecting such projects to open tenders, the fact that the competitive bidding has been breached in gifting the projects to DP World may be a moot point.

    Dubai World has displayed dubious tactics since first expressing interest in a port concession in Kenya in 2006.

    Political fortunes
    American economic historian Fred Cooper described the African state as the “gate keeper” where elites are perpetually fighting to earn corruptly acquired money through control of ports, customs centres and other interfaces between their countries and the rest of the world.

    The DP World saga appears to be the latest in the scramble by corrupt elites to control the gate. The scramble has assumed global dimensions in Kenya in the past one year.

    International ports and transport logistics operators are involved in battles over ownership and control of port concessions or control over profitable projects involving development and building storage and logistics facilities along main transport corridors. It is a vicious fight where only players enjoying patronage of powerful godfathers succeed.

    Public litigation actors have already – at the behest of a global shipping group – lodged a legal battle where they have injuncted a plan by the government to shift control and ownership of the Japanese-built ultra-modern second container terminal to a consortium compromising the state-owned Kenya National Shipping Lines (KNSL) and Portuguese player – Mediterranean Shipping Lines (MSL).

    The timing of the case, came just as the government had concluded plans to hand over management of the terminal to an entity effectively under the control of MSL, would appear to suggest shipping lines opposed to this deal calculated that they would rather have the deal postponed until after the elections.

    Political undercurrents

    They hedged their bets on the possibility that the new government will be inclined to block the deal.

    Dubai Ports first entered the Kenyan fray in 2014 when the government floated an international competitive tender to concession the second container terminal in Mombasa.

    Port operators from China, Japan, Singapore, Netherlands and several other countries participated in the tender.

    The Chinese group, PSA International, which had partnered with local firm, Multiple Hauliers, had the highest marks, with DP World emerging second.

    The process was then cancelled amid political undercurrents. Having lost in the open tender, DP World devised another approach.

    In October 2016, the UAE quietly signed a bilateral agreement where it committed to lend Kenya $275 million (Sh32.4 billion) for expansion of the second container terminal on condition that Kenya allowed DP World to take control of the terminal.

    Two months later, the UAE ambassador wrote to the National Treasury.

    What happened next is still difficult to decipher. It seems political fortunes of DP World and its backers took a nosedive. Transferring the second terminal to DP World no longer enjoyed the support of the political elite.

    In August 2018, the Cabinet decided to transfer the operations and management to the State-owned and almost moribund KSNL in a deal that included a new shareholding arrangement between that parastatal with MSL.

    Effectively, the power and control of the terminal had been transferred to the Portuguese firm.

     

  • Secret Dubai Port (DP) World and Kenyan Government  Deal That Went Sour. Kenya Now Disowns.

    Secret Dubai Port (DP) World and Kenyan Government Deal That Went Sour. Kenya Now Disowns.

    Kenya had agreed to offer preference to DP World, owned by the government of Dubai and one of the world’s largest port operators, in a deal inked between the two States.

    DP World said the Kenyan government had promised to issue a request for a commercial proposal for the port deals before the August 9 General Election. Under the deal, DP World was to deploy its money to build three berths at the Mombasa port, develop cold storage supply chains in Kisumu and Naivasha and to build a special economic zone in Lamu.

    The Dubai firm was to submit a commercial proposal to equip and operate the three completed berths in Lamu.

    Kenya has however disowned promises of the tender made to Dubai Port (DP) World that would have allowed the UAE-based firm to offer a bid for development, operation and management of the country’s four ports.The Treasury has disowned the existence of such a deal and denied ever mentioning plans to issue a tender by July.

    It was a ‘government-to-government’ agreement signed proposing to DP world to take part in the process. It was an agreement to explore how DP World can provide gateways into the country and the hinterland. Kenya Treasury CS Ukur Yatani has denied the deal.

    When requested comments on whether the request for proposal (RFP) will be issued this month, Treasury Cabinet Secretary Ukur Yatani replied “No,” via text without offering any explanations. 

    Typically once an RFP is issued bidders are given weeks to fill and submit bids outlining the amount of investment required, financing options and a feasibility study which could take months.

    DP World first entered the fray in Kenya in 2014 when the government floated an international competitive tender to concession the second container terminal in Mombasa. Port operators from China, Japan, Singapore, Netherlands and several other countries participated in the tender.

    The Chinese group, PSA International, which had partnered with a local firm, Multiple Hauliers, had the highest marks, with DP World emerging second but was to secure the tender through backdoor like it had done in other countries before.

    The process was then cancelled amid political undercurrents. The Treasury Cabinet Secretary previously confirmed that DP World were among many port operators being explored by the government as potential private partners to run the new Lamu Port. 

    DP World has a controversial record. In February 2006, an announcement by DP World that it was taking over management of six US ports in a $3.7 billion (Sh436 billion) deal kicked up a controversy in Congress, mainly on security considerations. Under pressure and public scrutiny, DP World dropped the deal.

    In 2012, Djibouti filed an arbitration case in London against DP World, claiming that the firm bribed an official to secure concession to run Dolareh – the largest container terminal in Africa. Though Djibouti lost, the case revealed insights into dealings between corrupt elites and global concession operators.

    How Dubai Firm DP World Plotted To Fraudulently Secure Control Of Walvis Bay Port

     

    The 2019 Fishrot scandal was a moment of epiphany for many Namibians; a coming to terms with the unpleasant reality that Namibia’s public service has been a hotbed for corruption for many years. And the recently hatched Walvis Bay Port syndicate indicates that, that unfortunate reality remains the status quo.

    In 2019, DP World, the Dubai-owned port operator, under the aegis of Sultan Bin Sulayem, with support from the former Transport Executive Director, Willem Goeimann orchestrated a plan to gain control of the newly constructed N$4.2 billion Walvis Bay container terminal through a direct agreement for a period of 50 years.

    DP World’s strategy included extending unwarranted generosity to several Namibian decision makers, some of whom were completely oblivious of their true intent; to avoid a competitive process that would most probably undercut their chances of controlling this strategic asset.

    To bypass Namibia’s procurement laws and justify a direct agreement, DP World’s agents pushed for a largely farcical Government-to-Government agreement between UAE and Namibia, which was a mere smokescreen, hiding DP World’s real motive.

    This deception was clearly manifested when they signed an MOU with Nara Namib to develop a Free Economic Zone in Walvis Bay.

    Notwithstanding their well-orchestrated scheme, in a real show of patriotism, a number of government officials and members of the Board of Directors of Namport turned down DP World’s direct agreement proposal as was the case in Kenya. It was considered dangerous and inimical to the interest of Namibia.

    Following the rejection of DP World’s direct agreement proposal, the expectation from all stakeholders, both local and international, was that the Government of Namibia would revert to the due process by instituting a fair and transparent tender process to award the concession of the strategic Walvis Bay Container Terminal, in the interest of the Namibian people.

    Alas, doing something as noble as that would have been completely out of character for the current Namibian government. Instead, it was Sultan bin Sulayem, the senior management of DP World and their local associates that quickly adapted to the new situation and came up with a new plan to achieve their unscrupulous agenda.

    Under the pretext of a transparent process facilitated by the Namibia Investment Promotion and Development Board (NIPDB) run by the capable CEO (some would say pawn) Nangula Uaandja, invitations for the Expressions of Interest (EOI) were sent out to a large number of potential operators, selected by NIPDB.

    However, this was just a ruse to give the impression that the country’s procurement laws are being complied with. Several sources disclosed that DP World managed to influence and manipulate the evaluation criteria in such a manner that it will disqualify all other offers save theirs and those of sister companies.

    They simply managed to get NIPDB to combine three different components (container terminal, free zone and a custom’s single window), which in reality requires completely different skills and criteria, under the fancy marketing name of “Walvis Bay Industrial Development Initiative (WIDI”).

    Combining these components would have most likely proved detrimental to the country, but it seems no one made the effort to analyse it in detail.

    The process was structured in such a way that only the Government of Dubai, which owns DP World, Jebel Ali Free Zone and the Dubai customs, could comply with the selection and evaluation criteria.

    All the other companies were only invited to legitimise the process and make it look transparent and credible. With that pseudo legitimacy, NIPDB, which has ultimate control over the process, will be able to evaluate the proposals against the selected criteria, eliminate the rest of the companies and enter into direct negotiations with DP World.

     

  • Corruption: How Dubai Firm DP World Plots To Fraudulently Secure Control Of Walvis Bay Port

    Corruption: How Dubai Firm DP World Plots To Fraudulently Secure Control Of Walvis Bay Port

    NAMIBIA: The 2019 Fishrot scandal was a moment of epiphany for many Namibians; a coming to terms with the unpleasant reality that Namibia’s public service has been a hotbed for corruption for many years. And the recently hatched Walvis Bay Port syndicate indicates that, that unfortunate reality remains the status quo. In 2019, DP World, a Dubai-owned port operator, under the aegis of Sultan Bin Sulayem, with support from the former Transport Executive Director, Willem Goeimann orchestrated a plan to gain control of the newly constructed N$4.2 billion Walvis Bay container terminal through a direct agreement for a period of 50 years.

    DP World’s strategy included extending unwarranted generosity to several Namibian decision makers, some of whom were completely oblivious of their true intent; to avoid a competitive process that would most probably undercut their chances of controlling this strategic asset. To bypass Namibia’s procurement laws and justify a direct agreement, DP World’s agents pushed for a largely farcical Government-to-Government agreement between UAE and Namibia, which was a mere smokescreen, hiding DP World’s real motive. This deception was clearly manifested when they signed an MOU with Nara Namib to develop a Free Economic Zone in Walvis Bay.

    Notwithstanding their well-orchestrated scheme, in a real show of patriotism, a number of government officials and members of the Board of Directors of Namport turned down DP World’s direct agreement proposal. It was considered dangerous and inimical to the interest of Namibia. Following the rejection of DP World’s direct agreement proposal, the expectation from all stakeholders, both local and international, was that the Government of Namibia would revert to the due process by instituting a fair and transparent tender process to award the concession of the strategic Walvis Bay Container Terminal, in the interest of the Namibian people.

    Alas, doing something as noble as that would have been completely out of character for the current Namibian government. Instead, it was Sultan bin Sulayem, the senior management of DP World and their local associates that quickly adapted to the new situation and came up with a new plan to achieve their unscrupulous agenda.

    Under the pretext of a transparent process facilitated by the Namibia Investment Promotion and Development Board (NIPDB) run by the capable CEO (some would say pawn) Nangula Uaandja, invitations for the Expressions of Interest (EOI) were sent out to a large number of potential operators, selected by NIPDB. However, this was just a ruse to give the impression that the country’s procurement laws are being complied with. Several sources disclosed that DP World managed to influence and manipulate the evaluation criteria in such a manner that it will disqualify all other offers save theirs and those of sister companies. They simply managed to get NIPDB to combine three different components (container terminal, free zone and a custom’s single window), which in reality requires completely different skills and criteria, under the fancy marketing name of “Walvis Bay Industrial Development Initiative (WIDI”).

    Combining these components will most likely prove detrimental to the country, but it seems no one made the effort to analyse it in detail. The process was structured in such a way that only the Government of Dubai, which owns DP World, Jebel Ali Free Zone and the Dubai customs, could comply with the selection and evaluation criteria. All the other companies were only invited to legitimise the process and make it look transparent and credible. With that pseudo legitimacy, NIPDB, which has ultimate control over the process, will be able to evaluate the proposals against the selected criteria, eliminate the rest of the companies and enter into direct negotiations with DP World.

    In a blatant disregard and contravention of the laws of Namibia, Namport, which according to the Namibian Ports Authority Act, 1994 is the only authority that has jurisdiction over the port of Walvis Bay, was completely excluded from the process.

    Sources close to Namport intimated that it had been engaging a number of potential partners who were prepared to offer much better terms than DP World yet; their hands are tied as a result of the processes that are being facilitated by NIPDB. As a result, the road is clear for DP World to gain control of these critical and vital assets at the expense of Namibia and its people. Institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank and the African Development Bank (who financed the construction of the container terminal) should step in and make sure that their assistance and contributions are serving the people of Namibia and not DP World, a company owned by the Government of Dubai.

    It seems as if there is no end when it comes to Namibia’s strategic resources and unscrupulous foreign opportunists. As with the Fishrot saga, all you need is the opportunity, an architect to draft the master plan, a local agent that knows how to manipulate the system, a few key officials and the unscrupulous foreign investor to exploit Namibia and deprive it of real economic development.

    One would think that President Geingob and his government would by now have resolved to do everything in their power to avoid another N$ billion corruption scandal, which could undermine his and the ruling party’s credibility, but alas, they remain unperturbed. They remain so even as the scourge of corruption continues to ravage the lives of ordinary Namibians.