Premium
Kenha boss faces jail for disobeying order to pay Sh530m to contractor
The Kenya National Highways Authority Acting Director-General Luka Kimeli is staring at a jail term.
The Kenya National Highways Authority Acting Director-General Luka Kimeli is staring at a jail term not exceeding six months after the High Court convicted him of disobeying a court order to pay a contractor more than Sh500 million.
Mr Kimeli has been summoned to appear before a court in Nairobi on December 19 for mitigation and sentencing for contempt of court.
In Kenya, the jail term for contempt of court is a maximum of six months’ imprisonment, either alone or in combination with a fine not exceeding Sh200, 000, as per the Contempt of Court Act.
The Kenha chief was found guilty of defying a court order directing the agency to settle a debt of Sh536,464,436 owed to an Israel construction firm — SBI International Holdings (Kenya) Limited — despite proposing a payment plan.
"In the view of this court, the respondent (Mr Kimeli) has elected to trifle with the authority of judicial orders, adopting a posture of waiting to see what consequences may follow, in the hope that none will. This conduct is wholly unacceptable," said the court in a ruling on November 25.
The Judicial Review Division of the High Court said the Kenha acting director was in contempt of court for failing to obey the decree issued by the court on September 23, 2023, compelling the authority to settle the debt.
Mr Gilad Mishni, the construction firm's managing director, told the court that a judgment was made in its favour in 2023 and that the parties even recorded a consent order on how the decree was to be settled.
He urged the court to find the agency in contempt of court, arguing that it was the only avenue by which the decree would be settled.
SBI International Holdings said the delay in the settlement of the debt had prejudiced it despite having fulfilled part of its bargain.
In the circumstances, according to the contractor, “the conduct of Kenha can only be described as a deliberate and wilful refusal to obey a subsisting order of the court.”
In response, Mr Kimeli said the authority had not disputed its obligation to settle the debt and had made efforts to comply with court orders, including partial payments to the company.
According to Mr Kimeli, on December 19, 2023, Kenha committed to a structured payment plan to clear the outstanding debt in six equal instalments starting January 2024.
He informed the court that the agency has so far paid Sh1.2 billion and was pursuing funds to clear the balance, as some substantial funds were held in litigation and preserved by a court order.
Roads PS informed
Court records indicated that the agency wrote to the Principal Secretary for Roads on May 16, 2025, informing the PS of the balance due for settlement in favour of the construction firm.
Mr Kimeli said the agency had requested an additional budget allocation to enable it to settle the amount due and confirmed that the agreed payment proposal was still being processed.
He pleaded with the court, saying the delay in paying the debt was not due to wilful disobedience but budgetary constraints and administrative processes within the roads agency.
The court, however, dismissed Mr Kimeli’s explanation, arguing that a statutory body that “elects to disobey orders undermines public confidence in lawful administration.”
According to the court, the continued default, in the face of a binding consent and statutory funding mechanisms, constituted wilful contempt.
"The respondent’s persistent non-settlement of the decree, its breach of the consent order of December 19, 2023, and its failure to act in accordance with its statutory obligations constitute wilful and deliberate disobedience of lawful orders of this court," observed the court.
The court also noted that the agency had full knowledge of the orders, having participated in the proceedings, executed a consent settlement on December 19, 2023, and repeatedly appeared through counsel to address the issue of compliance.
Further, the court reprimanded the agency, saying the only defence offered was that it had paid part of the decretal sum and was making efforts to settle the balance.
