Mudavadi demands answers on fate of SGR

ANC party leader Musalia Mudavadi wants Treasury and Transport ministries to come clear on the fate of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) after a court declared the mega project illegal.

Mudavadi said cabinet secretaries Ukur Yattani (National Treasury) and James Macharia (Transport) should explain to Kenyans the implication of the court ruling on ongoing construction.

He said Kenyans need a proper explanation because the SGR project is one of the largest single investments Kenya has made up to date.

“The fundamental question that we ask is that if so much money has been spent through a process that has been found to have been riddled with illegalities, what does that mean for the money that has already been spent by the Kenyan people?” he posed.

The Court of Appeal on Friday declared the over Sh500 billion contract between Kenya and China for the construction of SGR illegal.

Court of Appeal Judges Martha Koome, Gatembu Kairu, and Jamila Mohammed ruled that the government failed to follow procurement laws while contracting China Bridges and Railway Corporation (CBRC) for the project.

The government has completed phase one of SGR from Mombasa to Nairobi that cost Sh327 billion. Phase two from Nairobi to Naivasha cost Sh150 billion. The final phase from Naivasha to Malaba is projected to cost Sh380 billion.

Mudavadi wants the two Cabinet Secretaries to furnish Kenyans with the true picture of what transpired during the entire process.

Musalia, who has been asking the government to renegotiate her public debt with its donors, says the pronouncement by the Court of Appeal now puts Kenya at crossroads with the international donor communities and in particular China, the key financiers of the SGR project.

“The two CSs should also explain how this plays out with our international friends. How will this pronouncement play out in the broader debt profile that is hurting the Kenyan people and how will it impact on the possible discussions that require rescheduling and restructuring of the Kenyan debt,” he added.

The judges of the Court of Appeal faulted Kenya Railways Corporation, saying as the procuring entity, it failed to comply with, and violated provisions of Article 227 (1) of the Constitution and Sections 6 (1) and 29, of the Public Procurement and Disposal Act, 2005 in the procurement of the SGR project. 

Justices Martha Koome, Gatembu Kairu and Jamila Mohamed said it was not accurate, as was claimed by KR that the engagement of CRBC as the contractor was as a result of dictation by the financing agreement.

They added that the engagement of CRBC was not an obligation arising from “negotiated grant or loan” agreement for purposes of Section 6 of the Act.

Activist Okiya Omtatah, together with the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), had challenged the project arguing that it was single-sourced yet it is financed by Kenyans.

He argued that Kenyans will not get value for money as the project’s cost was inflated.