Court okays West Kenya push to pump Sh5Bn in Nzoia sugar
Judge Lawrence Mugambi says petition filed by Wafula Wamunyinyi was “res judicata,” meaning already adjudicated.
West Kenya Sugar Company, a subsidiary of the Rai Group, can now proceed with its KES5.76 billion investments in Nzoia sugar company after the High Court in Nairobi dismissed a petition challenging the government's move to lease the struggling miller and other state-owned sugar companies.
In a judgment delivered virtually by Justice Lawrence Mugambi at the Milimani Law Courts, the court upheld preliminary objections filed by the State and other parties and ruled that the petition filed by Wafula Wamunyinyi was “res judicata,” meaning already adjudicated.
Related
West Kenya Sugar Company responds to illegal sugar imports scandal
Sugar, Cement and Steel; the tycoons' race to capture Kenyan industry
He said that the matter had already been conclusively decided in a previous case and could not be litigated again.
The court found that the issues raised, particularly the alleged lack of public participation in the leasing process had been conclusively settled in Martin Nyongesa Barasa vs. Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture & Others.
Dated March 20, 2025, the petition contested an international tender notice issued on February 28, this year by the Ministry of Agriculture inviting bids for leasing publicly owned sugar companies in which the petitioners claimed the process lacked public participation and transparency. They argued that these violated Articles 10, 201, and 227 of the Constitution.
Justice Mugambi noted that this issue had been conclusively decided following a comprehensive determination in the 2024 ruling by Justice E.C. Mwita, which found that adequate public participation had been conducted.
The court also determined that both suits challenged the same leasing process and were based on the same tender subject matter—the international leasing of publicly owned sugar companies, including Nzoia Sugar.
Mr Justice Mugambi said the issues in both petitions were identical, save for the financial years the tenders were issued and noted that “repackaging” the same complaint with minor changes, such as a new tender number or a different petitioner, amounted to an abuse of court process.
“This finding is sufficient to dispose of this Petition without any further consideration of any other issue. At this juncture I cannot proceed any further, I must down my tools,” ruled Justice Mugambi.
