In a lawsuit that could redefine Kenya’s control over its strategic assets, Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah has accused the government of quietly advancing a secret IMF pipeline deal to privatize Kenya Pipeline Company behind the backs of citizens and Parliament. Filed on January 2, 2026, the petition paints a picture of foreign-driven economic decision-making, alleged constitutional violations, and billions of shillings in public wealth at risk. At the centre of the storm is a profitable state monopoly and a deal critics say threatens national sovereignty. At stake is more than a company. This battle confronts foreign influence, constitutional order, and whether Kenya’s most strategic assets remain firmly under public control. Secret IMF Deal and the Fight for Kenya Pipeline Company The constitutional petition, lodged at the High Court by Omtatah alongside Bernard Muchiri Muchere and Naomi Nyakerario Misati, challenges the government’s plan to offload 65 per cent of Kenya Pipeline Company through an Initial Public Offering by March 2026. The petitioners argue that the move is not rooted in public interest or economic logic, but in pressure exerted by the International Monetary Fund.
According to court filings, the government’s privatisation agenda is allegedly tethered to IMF loan conditionalities that require Kenya to reduce its role in state-owned enterprises. The petition describes this influence as unconstitutional external interference that undermines the will of the Kenyan people and bypasses safeguards embedded in public finance and governance laws.
Kenya Pipeline Company remains wholly government-owned and financially robust. In 2024 alone, it posted a profit of KSh 6.87 billion and paid KSh 7 billion in dividends to the National Treasury. The petitioners argue that selling such a revenue-generating monopoly to plug debt gaps violates principles of prudent public finance and long-term national planning. IMF Pressure or Public Policy Choice A key pillar of the case is the assertion that the privatisation drive is not a sovereign policy choice. The petition explicitly states that the proposed sale is driven by IMF pressure rather than democratic decision-making. This, they argue, offends constitutional provisions that vest economic sovereignty in the people of Kenya.
The lawsuit questions why a strategic energy infrastructure entity is being rushed to market despite its profitability and central role in national fuel security. Petitioners warn that surrendering majority control could expose the country to private interests with little accountability while locking Kenyans out of a critical economic artery.
By framing the dispute around the secret IMF pipeline deal, the case elevates the matter from a routine privatisation debate to a broader confrontation over who truly sets Kenya’s economic agenda. Billions in Question and Missing Accountability Beyond the proposed sale, the petition raises alarm over KSh 97 billion in retained earnings and depreciation funds at Kenya Pipeline Company that are allegedly unaccounted for. These funds, accumulated over years of operation, represent public wealth whose status remains unclear.
The petitioners argue that before any talk of privatisation, the government must account for these funds and explain why a company sitting on such reserves is being positioned for sale. They contend that disposing of KPC without resolving these questions risks masking past financial mismanagement and transferring unresolved liabilities to the public.
This financial opacity, they claim, strengthens the case that the privatisation process is neither transparent nor compliant with constitutional standards of accountability. Flawed Process and Legal Shortcuts The lawsuit also attacks the procedure used to advance the privatisation agenda. According to the petition, there was no meaningful public participation despite constitutional requirements for citizen involvement in decisions affecting public assets.
Further, the petition challenges the legality of appointments made to the Privatisation Commission, alleging irregularities that compromise its independence and credibility. It also faults Parliament for approving the plan through a Sessional Paper rather than substantive legislation, which the petitioners say is an unlawful shortcut for a decision of such magnitude.
In their prayers to the court, the petitioners ask for the entire privatisation process to be declared unconstitutional, all related notices and decisions quashed, and any future attempt to sell Kenya Pipeline Company to be permanently barred.
Notably, they seek no personal compensation. They describe the case as pure public interest litigation aimed at safeguarding assets owned collectively by Kenyans.
If the court sides with Omtatah and his co-petitioners, the ruling could halt the secret IMF pipeline deal and set a powerful precedent on foreign influence, public debt management, and the limits of executive power. Either way, the case has already ignited a national reckoning over who controls Kenya’s most valuable state enterprises and in whose interests they are managed.