Asharami Synergy, a Nigerian company and part of the Sahara Group, was selected to build and run a 30,000-metric-tonne liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) facility in Changamwe, Mombasa. The land for this project, measuring 23.19 acres, belongs to Kenya Petroleum Refineries Ltd (KPRL), which is under the Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC).
The project is part of Kenya’s wider plan to give all Kenyans access to clean cooking energy by the year 2030. However, despite its promising goals, serious questions have come up about how the lease for this public land was granted to Asharami Synergy.
As reported by MOE on X, there are growing concerns over missing legal and environmental steps in the leasing process.According to reports, Asharami Synergy was given a 31-year lease without completing a new environmental impact study and without the Attorney General’s consent.
This raises legal concerns because public land projects in Kenya are expected to meet clear requirements, including environmental assessments and formal approvals.
The deal was also reportedly signed before the publication of a Gazette notice, which usually comes first as part of the public participation process.
This means that the deal was finalized behind closed doors, without public knowledge, which goes against transparency standards.
There’s also some confusion about the environmental impact study. Earlier, KPC had spent around Sh192.64 million on project planning and included an environmental and social impact assessment as part of its own proposal to build a similar facility. However, it’s not clear whether this previous assessment is valid for Asharami Synergy’s project or if a new one was needed.
The lack of clarity has added to the suspicion that shortcuts may have been taken to push the lease through.Another serious concern is whether the Attorney General gave legal consent before the lease was granted. This step is vital when leasing public land, but no confirmation has been provided so far.
The fact that the Gazette notice came after the deal was already signed makes it look like the public was informed too late, possibly on purpose. This unusual order of events has raised questions about whether the process was manipulated to benefit the private company involved.
Asharami Synergy’s presence in Kenya’s energy sector has not been without controversy. In the past, the company was part of a government-to-government oil import arrangement that faced criticism.
Back in 2020, a shipment from the company was even rejected by KPC, leading to a legal fight at the international level. Despite these past tensions, the government still chose to hand over this LPG project to Asharami, sidelining KPC, even after it had already invested heavily in planning.
Critics are now questioning why a foreign company was picked for such a strategic project while a capable local state-owned company was ignored. The situation has raised public outcry, especially given the lack of transparency around the lease. Many believe this deal puts foreign interests ahead of local development and accountability.
As of now, neither the government nor Asharami Synergy has given a clear statement to address the legal and environmental questions being asked.
This issue comes at a time when Kenya is trying to improve its image on governance and environmental responsibility.
If these allegations are confirmed, they could damage trust in public-private partnerships and the government’s commitment to environmental protection.
While the LPG facility could help reduce Kenya’s use of harmful fuels and improve public health, these benefits should not come at the cost of ignoring important legal and ethical standards.
The public is now waiting for answers, and possibly legal action, to ensure that public land is handled with care and in full view of the law.
