Two Public Benefit Organisations (PBOs) have sued Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) in relation to reconstruction of a holding bay on the mainland side at Likoni Ferry crossing which they claim costs approximately KES 1.5 billion.
Kenya Legal Trust Fund (KLTF) and One Clear Mission Organization (OCMO) say that they have observed that construction works are currently ongoing at the Likoni Ferry crossing on public land.
They argue that the respondents have failed to disclose procurement records for the public project.
According to the organisations, the construction is under a project known as “Proposed Holding Bay Reconstruction at Mainland Side at Likoni Ferry Crossing Lot 1A-KPA/193/2024-25/PDM.
In their petition at the Environment and Land Court, the petitioners say that according to information displayed on the project signboard, the sub-project is described as a Temporary bus terminal with an estimated project duration of 24 months.
Apart from KPA, the petitioners have also sued Resconsult Ltd, Limitless Trading Ltd, National Environment and Management Authority (NEMA), county government of Mombasa and National Construction Authority.
“The respondents have failed to disclose the number of bidders and the competitive procurement process undertaken,” part of the petition states.
Through lawyer Mwaniki Gitahi, the petitioners further claim that the respondents have failed to provide valuation reports and projects costing documentation.
According to the petitioners, the respondents have also failed to provide evidence of public participation and complete environmental approvals and compliance reports.
They are seeking a declaration that the respondents’ failure to undertake adequate, meaningful and effective public participation prior to commencement of the project violates the constitution and renders the project unconstitutional, unlawful and invalid.
The petitioners argue that given the substantial public expenditure involved, they reasonably expect that the project should comply with all constitutional, statutory and regulatory requirements governing procurement, environmental protection, public participation and construction approvals.
They also claim that they have established that critical information required by law has not been disclosed to the public.
The petitioners claim that no public participation was undertaken prior to commencement of the project despite it being situated on public land and involving substantial amounts of money.
“The petitioners have not seen any evidence of public participation undertaken before the commencement of the project,” part of the petition states.
The petitioners also argue that no notices, stakeholder consultations, public forums, community meetings, invitations for public comments or publication of project information were conducted or made available to the residents of Likoni and ferry users.
“The petitioners state that the Likoni Ferry crossing is a public facility serving thousands of people and any reconstruction, alteration, redevelopment, or establishment of a temporary bus terminal directly affects the public and requires meaningful and effective public participation,” the petitioners argue.
The petitioners claim that they believe that the project is being undertaken without full compliance with the constitution and various statutes governing public projects and environmental management.
They also argue that the respondents have failed to display mandatory project information required by law and provide evidence of county government and National Construction Authority (NCA) approvals.
The petitioners also want a declaration that the project cannot lawfully proceed without full compliance with constitutional, environmental, planning, procurement and construction laws.
They also want a conservatory order issued restraining the respondents from continuing with the construction works pending compliance with the constitution and the law.
The petitioners also want an order directing an independent audit of the procurement, environmental and regulatory compliance processes relating to the project.
KLTF and OCMO also want an order issued compelling the respondents to produce and disclose various documents among them tender advertisements, procurement records, tender evaluation reports and number of bidders and bidding records.
An application for conservatory orders being sought by the petitioners will be heard on September 24.
Be the First to Comment