An independent power-producing company owned by Daniel Arap Moi’s family has suffered a blow after a Nakuru court revoked its licence to undertake exploration and drilling activities at the Geothermal Development Company project in Menengai, Nakuru County.
High Court Judge Milicent Odeny in her judgment cancelled the Environmental Impact Assessment Report issued to Sosian Energy Limited by the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA).
“NEMA’s decision granting Sosian Energy Limited an Environmental Impact Assessment Licence No. NEMA/EIA/PSL/1003 is hereby set aside and License cancelled,” ruled Justice Odeny on March 17, 2025.
Sosian Energy, owned by the late President Daniel Arap Moi’s family, is the only local independent power producer in the country conducting exploration and drilling activities at the Menengai Geothermal fields.
Kanu chairman Gideon Moi's son, Kigen Moi, is a director of Sosian Energy and has been conducting exploration and drilling activities at the Menengai Geothermal Development Company fields.
The company had been issued with the EIA license by NEMA to undertake geothermal exploration drilling and construction of associated facilities and amenities on Plot No LR Makongeni/Menengai Block 1/169 (Menengai) and 161 in Makongeni/Menengai Area, Nakuru County.
Part of the project included the drilling of 3No Thermal Gradient Holes (TGH) to a depth of 200m, 4No Water wells, and 3No exploration drilling to a depth of 2.7 kilometres.
However, the community members within the Menengai West area opposed the approval of the project, claiming a lack of public participation before it was granted a license to operate.
Sosian Geothermal power plant in Menengai crater in Nakuru County.
Photo credit: Boniface Mwangi| Nation Media Group
Eight individuals from the Mengai West Stakeholders forum, filed the case on behalf of the community members, before the National Environment Tribunal in 2021, seeking to revoke the license and have a Strategic Environmental Assessment be undertaken for all geothermal activities planned by the Geothermal Development Company within Menengai, before the power company can undertake a fresh EIA report.
They sued NEMA and Sossian Energy Limited for what they claimed to be the unlawful issuance of the licence.
However, the tribunal in its decision in 2023, dismissed the case and directed the company to prepare and lodge with the NEMA a Climate Impact Assessment Study report within 24 months of the delivery of the Judgment.
Aggrieved by the decision the petitioners moved to the Environment and Lands Court, to appeal the judgment.
They also argued that the tribunal had failed to consider the validity and quality of the various environmental reports submitted, before the approval of the licenses.
According to the petitioners, the disputed geothermal activities were to be undertaken on private property, but within proximity of a bustling agricultural settlement with a population of approximately 163, 864 people, who have faced challenges of air pollution, excessive noise, and vibration from the activities.
The company, in its defence however, claimed to have conducted adequate public participation in line with the constitutional provisions and sought the views of all members of the public, who were likely to be affected by all phases of the project.
“We accorded members of the community and all relevant stakeholders an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the ideas of the project, opportunities to make contributions, and raise any concerns, which was done through consultation meetings, stakeholder meetings, and public barazas that were announced well in advance,” stated the company through its lawyer.
Sosian Geothermal power plant in Menengai crater in Nakuru County.
Photo credit: Boniface Mwangi| Nation Media Group
Justice Odeny in her ruling quashed the decision by the tribunal to dismiss the petition by the community members, after finding that the public participation process conducted was not adequate.
“There was a lapse in mandatory procedure for meaningful public participation. A project of such magnitude must address the concerns and potential risks and mitigation to the project affected people,” stated the judge.
The court further ruled that the climate impact assessment should be done before approval to allow proposed mitigation measures to be developed, clearly defined, and made available to the affected persons and agencies to review and give their comments.
“An order is hereby issued directing the 2nd respondent to carry out a comprehensive Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations taking into account the views of the appellants and the affected persons within the project area,” ordered Justice Odeny.
