Busia County Senator and activist Okiya Omtatah and two co-petitioners have moved to the High Court to block the planned privatisation of Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC), arguing the proposed sale is unconstitutional and driven by International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan conditions rather than a sovereign government decision.
In a petition filed at the Milimani Law Courts on Friday, January 2, 2026, Omtatah, alongside CFE Bernard Muchiri Muchere and Naomi Nyakerario Misati, is challenging the government’s plan to sell 65 per cent of KPC through an Initial Public Offering (IPO) by March 2026.
The petition names the National Executive, the Attorney General, the Privatisation Commission and Authority, the KPC board, the IMF, and the National Assembly among the respondents.
According to the petitioners, the proposed privatisation of KPC, a 100 per cent state-owned and profitable monopoly that transports and stores petroleum products, is “not a sovereign policy decision, but a direct condition imposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) under Kenya’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) and Extended Credit Facility (ECF) loan programme.”
“We argue that the process is unconstitutional, driven by external pressures from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), tainted by fraud, and violates Kenya’s sovereignty, national security, collective ownership, sustainable development, and public finance principles,” the petition states.
The petitioners contend that the Privatisation Acts of 2005 and 2025 are unconstitutional because they allow the sale of public assets built using taxpayer funds, allegedly violating constitutional principles of equity, collective ownership and intergenerational justice. They also raise concerns about alleged financial irregularities at KPC, pointing to its strong performance.
“KPC’s 2024 financials show a profit of Sh6.87 billion and dividends of Sh7 billion, but over Sh97 billion in retained earnings and depreciation funds are unaccounted for, suggesting siphoning,” the petition claims, warning that privatisation could “cover up this theft.”
The court challenge further questions the legality of the privatisation process, citing alleged irregular appointments at the Privatisation Commission.
The petitioners argue that the chairperson and members were “handpicked and appointed without competitive processes” and reappointed without performance reviews, rendering their decisions invalid.
They also accuse the government of failing to ensure transparency and public participation, saying there was no meaningful public input and no budget line for privatisation proceeds in the 2025/2026 estimates.
“The failure to anticipate proceeds of privatisation in the budget estimates approved by the National Assembly means that we are being fed a lie that the money is required to support budget deficits,” the petition states.
The petition seeks declarations nullifying the privatisation process, related laws and IMF conditionalities, and court orders quashing all decisions linked to the proposed sale. The petitioners say the case is a public-interest matter and have asked the court to award no costs.
