How Adani is plotting comeback after losing Sh258b JKIA deal

The Kenya Airports Authority last week unveiled a sweeping 20-year blueprint for the transformation of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, but the ambitious plan has revived concerns that the controversial Adani Group could be circling the country’s aviation asset through the back door.

The JKIA Master Plan 2025-2045 outlines a multi-billion shilling upgrade that will increase the airport’s annual passenger handling capacity from 7.5 million to 12 million in its initial phase, with ultimate capacity targeting 22 million passengers.

According to documents seen by The Standard, the project will be implemented in two phases - the first involving construction of a new terminal capable of handling 10 million passengers annually, followed by a second phase expansion to accommodate 15 million passengers. The redesign, developed with global infrastructure consultancy Sidara, introduces an X-shaped terminal layout featuring four piers, a central processing hall, and critically, a second full-length runway to end JKIA’s risky dependence on its single, fatigued 06/24 runway.

But the master plan bears striking resemblance to the proposal tabled by India’s Adani Group before President William Ruto cancelled the controversial Sh258 billion concession in November 2024 following public outcry and a High Court challenge. That deal would have seen Adani build a second runway and new terminal in exchange for a 30-year operating lease.

Sources familiar with the negotiations have told The Standard that although Adani will not be directly involved this time, plans are afoot to nominate proxy companies to handle the expansion.

According to credible sources, two individuals with longstanding ties to the Adani empire Nasser Ali Shaban Ahli, a UAE citizen, and Chang Chung-Ling, a Taiwanese national are positioned to play key roles through Mauritius-based structures. Sources indicate the men are linked to a network of shell companies which could emerge as a vehicle for Adani’s re-entry into the JKIA project.

Politician Tony Gachoka, whose petition alongside the Kenya Human Rights Commission and Law Society of Kenya led to conservatory orders blocking the original Adani deal, told The Standard the new proposal raises immediate red flags.

“The Hindenburg Research report of 2023 and subsequent investigations by authorities in India raised serious eyebrows about possible offshore companies used to move funds and manipulate stock prices for Adani,” Gachoka said.

And the pieces are falling in place as the Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) last week formally confirmed before the High Court that the government cancelled the controversial Sh258 billion Adani Group deal for JKIA — while simultaneously revealing its intention to initiate fresh negotiations with the same Indian conglomerate or ‘other interested parties’.

Appearing before Justice Bahati Mwamuye on February 24, KAA’s lawyer Benson Oduwopar tabled a termination letter, finally providing documentary proof of cancellation months after President William Ruto’s public announcement. However, in a striking legal submission, Odiwuor argued that conservatory orders issued in November 2024 should be lifted because they were blocking the government from commencing “a fresh process” with Adani Group for the airport’s redevelopment.

The admission came during a mention of the consolidated petition filed by Gachoka and the Mount Kenya Jurists, who were the first to challenge the deal’s legality in 2024. Their lawyer, Ndegwa Njiru, had previously told the court that the proposed 30-year lease amounted to “sovereign robbery,” arguing that Adani would not invest its own funds but instead will use JKIA’s assets and revenue to secure loans.

The lead petitioner, Gachoka, says. “The cancellation by government of the Adani deal was not voluntary. It was compelled by our actions at the High Court. We went to court to protect the public trust and in the public interest until an initiative is put to the people for their participation- there is no way I will accept revisiting  the same. We will not lift the petition and the conservatory order until full public participation on this matter of JKIA is held openly. In other words, our airport is not for sale. Even those shadow companies that want to partner for expansion of JKIA, their partnership should undergo public participation.”

He added that his lawyers Kalonzo Musyoka and Eugene Wamalwa will head to court in April to protect the conservatory orders they secured against the Adani deal to remain intact and in force.

“What’s clear is that William Ruto’s government is looking for any illegal path void of public participation to acquire the airport and the problem is that the orders issued by Judge Bahati stop any further acquisition beyond Adani.  A conservatory order as issued by the High Court is a 360-degree protection of the JKIA, protecting the airport from Adani or any other party from touching our airport. So the government is strictly prohibited from selling the airport until conclusion of our case,” he says.

Gachoka and the Mount Kenya Jurists have maintained that Ruto’s November 2024 announcement cancelling the deal was insufficient without formal documentation. When the matter first came up after the President’s address, the Attorney General and Cabinet Secretaries informed the court through lawyer Dennis Mosota that they had not received any formal notice regarding cancellation, arguing that no contract had been signed as the deal was still in preliminary stages.

Senior counsel Musyoka, representing petitioners alongside lawyers Kibe Mungai, Wamalwa, and Dan Maanzo, told the court in November 2024 that Kenyans deserved to know who brought Adani to Kenya and that the case must proceed to its logical conclusion. Mungai stressed that they were also challenging the constitutionality of provisions in the Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) Act that underpinned the Adani-JKIA deal.

KAA’s Odiwuor told Justice Mwamuye on February 24 that “the current orders issued have perpetually limited my client KAA and most especially Adani Group since we intend to initiate a fresh process for the redevelopment of the airport.” This submission confirmed that despite the formal cancellation, the government’s appetite for an Adani partnership remains high.

The original deal, proposed in March 2024, would have seen Adani invest over Sh230 billion in upgrading and managing JKIA for over 30 years. Under the arrangement, Adani was to retain an 18 per cent equity stake in the airport’s aeronautical business and earn a concession fee starting at Sh6 billion, rising 10 per cent every five years.

Troubled by controversies

The Kenyan deal is not an isolated instance of Adani-facing controversy. The company’s track record across South Asia reveals a concerning pattern. 

In February 2025, the Adani Group withdrew from a proposed $440 million wind power project in Sri Lanka’s northern Mannar and Pooneryn regions. The project had attracted fierce criticism since it first emerged in 2022, with opposition parties and locals alleging it was not awarded through a transparent process.

In February 2025, The Guardian revealed that the Adani Group was building the world’s largest renewable energy park in Gujarat’s Rann of Kutch, barely one kilometre from the Pakistan border. The revelation sparked outrage from India’s opposition Congress party, which accused Prime Minister Modi’s government of endangering national security by changing defence rules to benefit Adani.

“Kenya’s airports and energy projects are vital to national security, sovereignty, and economy,” Gachoka argues “handing control of JKIA, Kenya’s main international gateway, to a foreign corporation for 30 years would compromise Kenya’s strategic interests.” 

He adds that the concession agreement was reportedly to be governed by English law, effectively excluding Kenyan courts from jurisdiction over any disputes, an arrangement petitioners argued erodes national sovereignty and denies Kenyans their day in court. 

“The deal was structured as a Privately Initiated Investment Proposal (PIP), violated the Public-Private Partnership Act due to a total lack of competitive bidding and public participation. The proposal was processed through over 10 government steps as a “national emergency,” steps that should ordinarily take at least 15 months under the law. This lack of transparency has led to suspicions that the government may be striking deals that favour private companies at the expense of the public interest.” 

The original agreement proposed that Adani invest over Sh230 billion in upgrading JKIA. However, Gachoka argued that Adani would not invest its own funds but instead use JKIA’s assets and revenue to secure loans, effectively turning Kenya’s asset into collateral for Adani’s borrowing. 

“Adani’s Project Implementation Proposal, submitted on March 1, 2024, lacked a clear outline of the amount the company intended to invest — an omission violating the Public-Private Partnership policy of 2011. Entering into agreements with such an entity poses a serious risk to Kenya’s economic independence and the transparent governance of its public resources,” says Gachoka.. 

With Justice Mwamuye’s refusal to lift conservatory orders, the status quo remains: no contract or concession agreement with Adani Group can be executed pending determination of the petition. The government must now file its detailed responses by mid-March, after which petitioners will have until April 17 to respond. The case will then proceed to hearing before a new judge starting May 6, 2026.