A parliamentary probe into the disputed Miwani sugar land has peeled back layers of what lawmakers now suggest could be one of Kenya’s most troubling land cases, marked by alleged forged court orders, untraceable payments and conflicting positions within state structures.
- •The National Assembly’s Lands Committee, chaired by Joash Nyamoko, is investigating how a prime industrial parcel tied to Miwani Sugar Company Limited changed hands.
- •At the centre of the inquiry is a 2007 public auction through which Crossley Holdings Limited claims to have acquired the land for KSh 752mn but, nearly two decades later, it is unclear who received the money.
- •Officials told the committee that no evidence exists showing that proceeds from the sale were ever remitted to the government or the receiver managing Miwani Sugar Company.
Proceedings heard that the sale stemmed from a 1993 case filed by a claimant, Nagendra Saxena, who allegedly sought to recover a KSh 114m debt from the sugar mill.
Judicial officials later indicated that the court order used to justify the auction may have been forged, and that the original case file could not be traced within court records. The fallout led to criminal charges in 2010 against court officials and private actors over alleged conspiracy to defraud and illegal acquisition of public property.
The ownership question has remained unresolved, in part due to conflicting court decisions. While the Court of Appeal of Kenya nullified the auction in 2011 and affirmed that the land belonged to Miwani Sugar Company, an earlier High Court ruling had favoured Crossley.
That contradiction appears to have also filtered into government policy. The Agriculture Ministry, acting on advice from the Office of the Attorney General, at one point moved to facilitate the transfer of the land to Crossley. In testimony before MPs, the Agriculture Principal Secretary reversed that position, stating that the land belongs to the Government of Kenya, exposing what lawmakers described as a fragmented and incoherent state response.
“The expectation is a unified government position,” Nyamoko said, as MPs questioned whether state agencies had failed to defend public interest in a case involving a strategic asset.
The parliamentary inquiry was triggered by a petition tabled by Suba South MP Caroli Omondi, which calls for a full accounting of the land’s ownership history, the identities behind Crossley Holdings, and the actions or inaction of public officials involved.
MPs are also seeking answers on whether there was collusion between private actors and state officials, and why successive administrations failed to implement the Court of Appeal’s decision.
