Civil Suit Targets Five Former Kenyan Officials Over Illegally Paid CHAN Tenders
Quote from Lawyer on August 18, 2025, 7:00 amIn a significant legal development, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) in Kenya has filed a civil suit against five former government officials and a French contractor, seeking to recover Sh220.4 million linked to alleged procurement irregularities during Kenya’s failed bid to host the 2018 African Nations Championship (CHAN). The lawsuit, lodged in Nairobi, centers on payments made in 2017 to Gregori International, a foreign company contracted to upgrade sports facilities for the tournament, which was ultimately relocated to Morocco due to Kenya’s failure to meet Confederation of African Football (CAF) standards.
The controversy stems from a Sh1.2 billion contract signed on September 14, 2017, with Gregori International. The agreement tasked the contractor with a comprehensive scope of work, including designing, mobilizing resources, removing grass, installing irrigation systems, leveling grounds, preparing soil, fertilizing, and planting Bermuda and Paspalum grass across five stadiums and ten training centers in Kenya. The EACC alleges that these payments were disbursed through a flawed direct procurement process, bypassing critical regulatory requirements and ignoring professional advice.
The officials named in the suit include former Sports Principal Secretary Peter Kaberia, former Football Kenya Federation (FKF) President Nick Mwendwa, Sports Kenya engineer and liaison officer John Ruga, former Ministry of Sports Director of Administration Haron Komen, and Isaac Okoth. Gregori International, the sixth defendant, is accused of receiving funds despite lacking legal authorization to operate as a contractor in Kenya.
The EACC’s case highlights multiple breaches in the procurement process. According to the commission, the Ministry of Sports failed to adhere to the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act by not notifying the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) within the mandatory 14-day period. Furthermore, the procurement lacked essential documentation, including bills of quantities, tender documents, detailed specifications, designs, and drawings. Instead, Gregori International allegedly provided its own specifications, raising concerns about transparency and fairness.
The EACC also claims that no bid bond was provided, no ad-hoc evaluation or negotiation committee was appointed, and no professional opinion was sought to validate the procurement process. Additionally, inspections to verify the contractor’s work were not conducted, casting doubt on whether the funds disbursed delivered value for money. The commission argues that these lapses violated not only the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act but also the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act and the Public Finance Management Act.
A critical point in the EACC’s case is the allegation that Gregori International was not registered with the National Construction Authority (NCA) and therefore lacked the legal authority to operate as a contractor in Kenya. The commission contends that the payments made to the company were unsupported by verifiable documentation, further compounding the irregularities.
Pending the court’s final ruling, the High Court has issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the Sports Department from making further payments to Gregori International or continuing with the contract. The EACC is seeking to recover the full Sh220.4 million, arguing that the funds were disbursed unlawfully. The defendants are now required to file their responses to the commission’s claims, setting the stage for a high-stakes legal battle.
This civil suit follows the withdrawal of a related criminal case by the State, indicating a shift to civil proceedings to recover the misappropriated funds. The case underscores ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability in Kenya’s public procurement processes, particularly for high-profile projects like the CHAN preparations.
Kenya’s bid to host the 2018 CHAN was marred by challenges from the outset. The country struggled to meet CAF’s stringent requirements, including upgrading stadiums and training facilities to international standards. The failure to complete these preparations led to CAF’s decision to strip Kenya of hosting rights, with Morocco stepping in as the replacement host. The financial fallout from this failed bid has now culminated in legal action against those responsible for overseeing the procurement process.
As the case progresses, all eyes will be on the High Court’s handling of the suit and the responses from the defendants. The outcome could set a precedent for how Kenya addresses procurement irregularities in future public projects. For now, the EACC’s pursuit of accountability reflects its broader mandate to combat corruption and recover public funds lost to malfeasance.
The public and stakeholders in Kenya’s sports and governance sectors await further developments, as the case could have far-reaching implications for how major infrastructural projects are managed and scrutinized in the country.
In a significant legal development, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) in Kenya has filed a civil suit against five former government officials and a French contractor, seeking to recover Sh220.4 million linked to alleged procurement irregularities during Kenya’s failed bid to host the 2018 African Nations Championship (CHAN). The lawsuit, lodged in Nairobi, centers on payments made in 2017 to Gregori International, a foreign company contracted to upgrade sports facilities for the tournament, which was ultimately relocated to Morocco due to Kenya’s failure to meet Confederation of African Football (CAF) standards.
The controversy stems from a Sh1.2 billion contract signed on September 14, 2017, with Gregori International. The agreement tasked the contractor with a comprehensive scope of work, including designing, mobilizing resources, removing grass, installing irrigation systems, leveling grounds, preparing soil, fertilizing, and planting Bermuda and Paspalum grass across five stadiums and ten training centers in Kenya. The EACC alleges that these payments were disbursed through a flawed direct procurement process, bypassing critical regulatory requirements and ignoring professional advice.
The officials named in the suit include former Sports Principal Secretary Peter Kaberia, former Football Kenya Federation (FKF) President Nick Mwendwa, Sports Kenya engineer and liaison officer John Ruga, former Ministry of Sports Director of Administration Haron Komen, and Isaac Okoth. Gregori International, the sixth defendant, is accused of receiving funds despite lacking legal authorization to operate as a contractor in Kenya.
The EACC’s case highlights multiple breaches in the procurement process. According to the commission, the Ministry of Sports failed to adhere to the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act by not notifying the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) within the mandatory 14-day period. Furthermore, the procurement lacked essential documentation, including bills of quantities, tender documents, detailed specifications, designs, and drawings. Instead, Gregori International allegedly provided its own specifications, raising concerns about transparency and fairness.
The EACC also claims that no bid bond was provided, no ad-hoc evaluation or negotiation committee was appointed, and no professional opinion was sought to validate the procurement process. Additionally, inspections to verify the contractor’s work were not conducted, casting doubt on whether the funds disbursed delivered value for money. The commission argues that these lapses violated not only the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act but also the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act and the Public Finance Management Act.
A critical point in the EACC’s case is the allegation that Gregori International was not registered with the National Construction Authority (NCA) and therefore lacked the legal authority to operate as a contractor in Kenya. The commission contends that the payments made to the company were unsupported by verifiable documentation, further compounding the irregularities.
Pending the court’s final ruling, the High Court has issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the Sports Department from making further payments to Gregori International or continuing with the contract. The EACC is seeking to recover the full Sh220.4 million, arguing that the funds were disbursed unlawfully. The defendants are now required to file their responses to the commission’s claims, setting the stage for a high-stakes legal battle.
This civil suit follows the withdrawal of a related criminal case by the State, indicating a shift to civil proceedings to recover the misappropriated funds. The case underscores ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability in Kenya’s public procurement processes, particularly for high-profile projects like the CHAN preparations.
Kenya’s bid to host the 2018 CHAN was marred by challenges from the outset. The country struggled to meet CAF’s stringent requirements, including upgrading stadiums and training facilities to international standards. The failure to complete these preparations led to CAF’s decision to strip Kenya of hosting rights, with Morocco stepping in as the replacement host. The financial fallout from this failed bid has now culminated in legal action against those responsible for overseeing the procurement process.
As the case progresses, all eyes will be on the High Court’s handling of the suit and the responses from the defendants. The outcome could set a precedent for how Kenya addresses procurement irregularities in future public projects. For now, the EACC’s pursuit of accountability reflects its broader mandate to combat corruption and recover public funds lost to malfeasance.
The public and stakeholders in Kenya’s sports and governance sectors await further developments, as the case could have far-reaching implications for how major infrastructural projects are managed and scrutinized in the country.