Court Orders Full Hearing of Sh220 Million CHAN Tender Dispute

Storm is brewing over a Sh220.4 million sports facilities deal after the High Court cleared the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) to proceed with a case seeking to recover money allegedly lost during preparations for the 2018 African Nations Championship (CHAN).

The decision is a setback for Gregori International, the contractor accused of being at the centre of irregularities surrounding a Sh995 million tender awarded for the design, rehabilitation and installation of sports facilities ahead of the continental tournament.

The case also brings former Sports Principal Secretary Kirimi Peter Kaberia, former Football Kenya Federation (FKF) president Nicholas Mwendwa and four other individuals back into the spotlight over a procurement saga dating back nearly a decade.

According to a report by the Nation, the defendants had sought to stop the case before the evidence could be tested in court. They argued that EACC had brought the suit too late and that the issues raised by the commission had already been dealt with in an earlier commercial dispute.

But Justice Rose Ougo rejected the attempt to have the case struck out, ruling that the allegations were serious enough to warrant a full hearing.

At the centre of the dispute is the 2017-2018 tender for the design, rehabilitation and installation of sports facilities for CHAN 2018. The tournament was hosted by Kenya and required the government to undertake major works at several sporting facilities.

Court rejects bid to shut down EACC case

EACC alleges that the procurement process was riddled with irregularities and that Gregori International did not meet a key regulatory requirement when it won the tender.

The commission claims the company was neither registered nor accredited by the National Construction Authority at the time it secured the Sh995 million contract. According to EACC, the contractor only obtained the required registration after the agreement had already been signed.

The anti-graft agency further alleges that public officials worked with the contractor to manipulate the procurement process, resulting in the payment of Sh220.4 million from public funds in circumstances EACC considers unlawful.

The commission has now turned to the courts seeking recovery of the money, arguing that the alleged loss resulted from corruption, abuse of office and fraudulent procurement.

Gregori International, however, has strongly challenged the case. The contractor argued that EACC’s claim should not be allowed to proceed because it was filed outside the applicable limitation period.

The company also relied on an earlier commercial dispute in which it had obtained a partial judgment against the Ministry of Sports. It argued that allowing EACC’s case to continue would effectively reopen questions that had already been determined.

The other defendants supported the application, maintaining that the anti-corruption proceedings amounted to an attempt to revisit an old dispute through a different legal route.

Justice Ougo disagreed.

The judge drew a clear line between the earlier commercial proceedings and the case now before the anti-corruption court. While the commercial dispute dealt primarily with contractual rights and obligations, the EACC case concerns alleged corruption and the recovery of public funds.

“The proceedings before court are not based on an ordinary contractual dispute,” Justice Ougo said, according to the Nation, adding that the case concerns allegations that public property was lost through corruption.

The distinction is significant because it means that a previous ruling on a contractual disagreement does not automatically settle separate allegations of corruption arising from the same transaction.

EACC gets chance to prove corruption claims

The court also rejected the argument that EACC had waited too long to bring the recovery case.

Justice Ougo held that the question of whether the suit was time-barred could not be properly determined before the court had heard evidence surrounding the procurement, investigations and recovery process.

“The court can’t determine at this stage whether the claim was time-barred without hearing evidence on the alleged corrupt procurement, investigations and recovery process,” the judge ruled, as reported by the Nation.

That means the defendants will now have to face the substantive case rather than having it dismissed on preliminary grounds.

The judge also rejected the suggestion that EACC was merely acting on behalf of the Attorney-General and therefore could not independently pursue the recovery proceedings.

According to the ruling, the Attorney-General’s role in representing the government in civil litigation is distinct from EACC’s constitutional responsibility to investigate corruption and pursue the recovery of public assets.

The ruling therefore gives the anti-graft agency a significant opening to present evidence on how the CHAN facilities contract was awarded and how the Sh220.4 million was allegedly lost.

The defendants named in the 2025 suit include Kaberia, Mwendwa, John Ruga, Haron Komen Chebet, Isaac Okoth Omogi and Gregori International. The Principal Secretary in the State Department for Sports is listed as an interested party.

For EACC, the case is now about more than an old sports infrastructure contract. It is an opportunity to establish whether public money allocated for a major international sporting event was improperly paid out and, if so, who should bear responsibility.

For the defendants, the full hearing presents the opportunity to challenge the commission’s allegations and explain their roles in the procurement and implementation of the project.

The court’s decision does not establish that corruption occurred or that any of the defendants are liable for the alleged loss. Those questions will only be answered after evidence is presented and tested during the trial.

But Justice Ougo’s ruling ensures that the allegations will not be buried behind preliminary objections.

The Sh220.4 million dispute, which began with preparations for CHAN 2018, has therefore entered a new phase — one in which EACC will finally get the chance to put its evidence before the court and seek answers over how millions of shillings meant for Kenya’s sporting infrastructure were spent.