✕

Court certifies urgent fresh petition challenging Dangote Lamu refinery

National
By Nancy Gitonga | Oct 08, 2026
President William Ruto and businessman Aliko Dangote during the groundbreaking of the Dangote East Africa Petroleum Refinery in Mokowe, Lamu County. [PCS]

The High Court has certified urgent a fresh petition seeking disclosure of key agreements and public commitments surrounding the Sh2.2 trillion Dangote oil refinery in Lamu.

Justice David Mburu of the Milimani High Court ordered that the case be heard on a priority basis after considering the application, supporting affidavit and petition filed by activist Francis Awino, who has accused the Government of secrecy over its deal with a private Nigerian tycoon and failure to disclose key agreements, financing arrangements and regulatory approvals.

“That matter is certified urgent and will therefore be heard on priority basis,” Justice Mburu directed.

 

The judge also ordered the Attorney-General, the National Treasury, the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, the Ministry of Lands, the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), the National Land Commission, Lamu County Government, Capital Markets Authority and Dangote East Africa Petroleum Refinery to file responses to the suit within seven days over the proposed refinery.

In his court papers, Awino contends that the lack of disclosure of critical information on the proposed refinery, including agreements, financing arrangements, public investment commitments and regulatory approvals raises concerns over the use of public funds, land and other State resources in the Sh2.2 trillion project.

Awino says he had sought information from the Government on the refinery but had not received details on the source, amount and terms of any public investment or the proposed State shareholding and other commitments.

“I have not been supplied with the source, amount, form, terms, recipient or timing of public investment, public equity investment, public debt, public guarantee, indemnity, debt assumption or contingent liability relating to the Project," he states.

Awino however says he is not opposed to industrialisation or lawful foreign investment but wants the Government to disclose information on the project before public resources and assets are committed.

He argues that his case raises constitutional questions touching on access to information, public participation, environmental governance, fiscal accountability, public finance and investor protection.

At the centre of the case is the alleged lack of disclosure on the financial, legal and regulatory arrangements underpinning the refinery, including the proposed use of public land, assets and National Infrastructure Fund resources.

Awino says that public reports indicate that the Government intends to obtain a stake in the project by deploying public assets and National Infrastructure Fund resources, but says key details have not been made available to the public.

He wants the Government to disclose the exact percentage of its proposed participation, the form of investment, risk allocation, legal instruments governing the investment and the financial commitments involved.

The petitioner is also seeking information on any proposed use of public funds, public land, public assets, public equity, guarantees, indemnities, tax incentives, subsidies and contingent liabilities connected to the refinery.

He has further asked for details of the proposed involvement of the National Infrastructure Fund, including the nature and amount of the investment and the terms under which public resources would be committed.

The petition comes days after President William Ruto and Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote broke ground for the proposed refinery in Lamu on September 30.

The project has been valued at about $16 billion, equivalent to Sh2.2 trillion, and is expected to process about 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day, according to material contained in the court file.

At the groundbreaking ceremony, the Government announced plans to participate in the project through the National Infrastructure Fund, with President Ruto saying the State would deploy public assets, including land, alongside the fund to invest in the refinery.

It is this proposed public participation that forms a central part of Awino's case, with the petitioner arguing that Kenyans should be given sufficient information to assess the legality, value, affordability and financial risks of the proposed State participation.

Awino is also challenging what he says is inadequate disclosure of the project's environmental and regulatory approvals.

Among the documents he wants disclosed are the EIA project report, environmental and social assessment study, EIA licence, public-hearing record, environmental management plan, marine-impact assessment, coastal-impact assessment, biodiversity assessment, waste-management plan, water-management plan and decommissioning plan.

The petitioner says the documents are necessary to determine whether the project has complied with constitutional and statutory requirements on environmental protection and public participation.

He further wants disclosure of project agreements, feasibility studies, due diligence reports, valuations, financial models, investment proposals and other records concerning the proposed refinery.

The petition also raises questions over reports that the Capital Markets Authority had raised issues concerning the proposed listing of shares linked to Dangote's Nigerian refinery and subsequent consideration of a Kenyan listing.

Awino says disclosure of the information is necessary before potentially irreversible commitments involving public resources are made.

He has consequently asked the court to preserve electronic and physical records relating to the project, including agreements, licences, approvals, permits, communications and documents concerning the National Infrastructure Fund's participation.

He also wants the court to stop the respondents from making irreversible or non-routine commitments of public resources pending determination of the petition.

However, the court has not granted the substantive conservatory orders sought by the petitioner at this stage.

The matter will be mentioned on November 12, 2026, to confirm compliance and for further directions.

Share this story
.
RECOMMENDED NEWS