Narok Senator Ledama Ole Kina has stirred fresh controversy over Kenya’s fuel procurement system after alleging major price discrepancies and possible collusion between oil marketers and government officials.
In a statement, the senator said he reviewed internal email exchanges between Oryx Energies and officials from the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum Kenya, including the Cabinet Secretary.
He claimed the emails showed agreement on a proposed fuel import price of USD 253.94 per metric tonne—far higher than the government’s reported import cost of USD 84.00 per metric tonne under the Government-to-Government (G-to-G) arrangement.
Ole Kina questioned the sharp price difference, saying it raises concerns about how the procurement process is being handled.
He argued that if oil marketing companies were not working in coordination with ministry officials, then the pricing gap remains difficult to explain.
He described the situation as a scheme driven by vested interests within the fuel supply chain, warning that Kenyans could be bearing the cost of inflated deals.
Substandard Fuel Shipment Raises Stakes
The senator also linked the pricing concerns to a shipment involving One Petroleum Limited. He alleged that a consignment of substandard fuel had already been imported and offloaded before the deal in question was cancelled.
According to him, the shipment cost the equivalent of USD 198,855 per metric tonne—still significantly higher than the government’s G-to-G rate. The claims have raised fresh concerns about fuel quality and the effectiveness of inspection processes.
The issue comes at a time when fuel prices remain high, despite government measures such as subsidies and tax adjustments aimed at easing the burden on consumers.
Questions Over Oversight and Transparency
Attention has also turned to the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority, which oversees fuel pricing and standards. Concerns have been raised about whether existing oversight mechanisms are sufficient to ensure transparency in procurement and quality control.
The shift from the Open Tender System to the G-to-G framework reduced competitive bidding, concentrating fuel importation among a limited number of firms. While the model was introduced to address foreign exchange pressures, it has continued to attract criticism over limited transparency.
Ole Kina’s claims are expected to increase pressure for further scrutiny, including calls for clarity on:
The actual cost of fuel imports
Agreements between oil firms and the government
Quality assurance procedures for imported fuel
Mounting Political Pressure
The remarks are likely to intensify scrutiny on senior officials within the Ministry of Energy, with calls for accountability expected to grow. Lawmakers and civil society groups have been pushing for a full review of the fuel procurement process.
If verified, the allegations could point to gaps in oversight and procurement management, raising broader concerns about how fuel import deals are negotiated and implemented.