The business empire linked to Mining, Blue Economy and Maritime Affairs Cabinet Secretary Hassan Joho’s family is reeling from a series of legal setbacks that have shaken its dominance in Kenya and in the East African region.
A string of court rulings and commercial siege in the last three years threatens to end the family’s grip on Kenya’s multibillion-shilling logistics and port infrastructure business.
From Mombasa to Nairobi and across the border in Juba, the family’s flagship firms — Autoport Freight Terminals and Portside Freight Terminals — have been fighting to hold onto the fortunes built around port operations, cargo handling, and strategic infrastructure.
The tide appears to have turned dramatically in recent months, with successive decisions by the High Court and the Supreme Court significantly eroding the family’s dominance in the cargo and logistics sector.
In August 2023, a quiet but far-reaching shift began when the Ministry of Transport and the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) opened the South Sudan cargo market to multiple players.
Previously, Autoport Freight Terminals, a firm closely associated with Joho’s elder brother Abu Joho, had enjoyed an almost monopolistic grip on transit cargo destined for South Sudan.
At the time, Mr Joho — an ally of Orange Democratic Movement leader Raila Odinga — did not see eye to eye with President William Ruto, who had just assumed office months earlier.
At the time, a letter dated July 25, 2023 from Transport Principal Secretary Mohamed Daghar announced the nomination of three other firms; Compact Consolbase, Mombasa Container Terminal, and Mitchell Cotts, to handle more than 1.1 million tonnes of cargo moving between Mombasa and South Sudan annually.
The decision effectively shattered Autoport’s stranglehold, handing rivals a fair share of the lucrative pie.
“Importers/cargo owners from South Sudan are free to choose any KRA/customs-approved facility,” wrote Mr Daghar.
The liberalisation followed years of industry lobbying and pressure from regional governments frustrated by alleged logistical delays, bottlenecks, and accusations of cargo auctioning under Autoport’s tenure.
While the dust was still settling on Autoport’s loss, a heavier legal blow landed in June 2025.
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court quashed a decision that had granted Portside Freight Terminals — a second firm linked to the Joho family — the green light to construct a second Sh6.4 billion bulk grain handling facility at the Port of Mombasa.
The apex court ruled that the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) had violated procurement laws by awarding the tender through the Specially Permitted Procurement Procedure.
Mining, Blue Economy and Maritime Affairs Cabinet Secretary Hassan Joho
Photo credit: File| Nation Media Group
This was not just a procedural setback. It was a symbolic strike at the heart of the Joho family’s ambitions to anchor itself deeper into Kenya’s port infrastructure.
In a separate development, South Sudan, the second largest user of the Mombasa port after Uganda, declared in June 2025 that it had cancelled the previous arrangement assigning 80 per cent of its seaborne cargo to Autoport and just 20 per cent to Compact Freight.
It cited cargo delays, bottlenecks, and even the disruption of United Nations shipments. Juba said that five firms should now handle its cargo.
Just last Month, the High Court temporarily ordered KPA to allocate cargo in line with South Sudan’s wishes — yet another major setback for the Joho family. Autoport applied to be enjoined in the case as an interested party.
“In other words, the protection of the supremacy of the Constitution is critical… there can be no greater public interest or interest of national security than to uphold the Constitution, its values and principles,” read the judgment signed by Justices Philomena Mwilu, Smokin Wanjala, Mohammed Ibrahim, Isaac Lenaola, and William Ouko.
Though KPA defended the move, citing national food security and the need to end the monopoly of Grain Bulk Handlers Ltd, the court ruled that public interest cannot override constitutional dictates on procurement.
This was not just a procedural setback. It was a symbolic strike at the heart of the Joho family’s ambitions to anchor itself deeper into Kenya’s port infrastructure.
In a parallel development, South Sudan, the second largest user of the Mombasa port after Uganda, declared in June 2025 that it had cancelled the previous arrangement assigning 80 percent of its seaborne cargo to Autoport and just 20 percent to Compact Freight.
Citing cargo delays, bottlenecks, and even disruption of United Nations shipments, Juba directed that five firms now handle its cargo.
Under the new distribution, Compact Freight would receive 30 percent of the cargo, Autoport 20 percent, Compact FTZ 20 percent, LPC Global 20 percent, and Precision Container Freight Station 10 percent.
Despite this, the Kenyan government allegedly dragged its feet on implementing the order, prompting Compact Freight to move to court.
Just last Month, the High Court temporarily ordered the Kenya Ports Authority to allocate cargo in line with South Sudan’s wishes, yet another major setback for the Joho family.
Justice Peter Mulwa’s ruling effectively slashed Autoport’s dominant market share from 80 to 20 percent pending further judicial directions.
The ruling was not only a financial hit, potentially costing the Joho family billions in annual revenue, it also stripped them of their political leverage in the regional logistics game.
Autoport applied to be enjoined in the case as an interested party, with its lawyers arguing that its business and legal interests were directly threatened by the Compact Freight case.
The company claimed it had made substantial investments based on existing agreements and contracts, and thus had a right to defend its commercial territory.
Containers at the Mombasa Port.
Photo credit: POOL|NMG
Justice Francis Gikonyo granted Autoport’s application and extended interim orders halting any cargo allocation formulae contrary to South Sudan’s June 16 directive.
Even so, the trajectory remains worrisome for the Joho family.
The legal terrain is shifting, and with every court session, the balance seems to tilt further away from the once-powerful Mombasa-based political dynasty.
In 2023, at the height of opposition’s anti-government protests, when the troubles for the Joho family businesses began with the Government directive, many observers linked the legal and business plights to the shifting political dynamics following the 2022 General Election.
Mr Joho, a former two-term governor of Mombasa and ODM deputy party leader, was a close ally of Azimio leader Raila Odinga during the bruising presidential contest against President William Ruto .
Following President Ruto’s win, there were murmurs within political and business circles that firms associated with opposition-aligned tycoons, especially those with lucrative government contracts, would come under fresh scrutiny.
Indeed, after the election, President Ruto moved swiftly to consolidate control over key economic sectors.
He initiated reforms across logistics, procurement, and infrastructure, moves interpreted by critics as an effort to loosen the influence of powerful business families tied to the previous regime.
However, with the formation of the broad-based government which brought in Mr Odinga’s allies, including Mr Joho to the cabinet, things have not been rosy still, as the Joho family businesses now continue to face legal dilemmas in court.
For years, Autoport and Portside were seen as case studies in the blending of political capital and private enterprise.
Autoport’s cargo handling monopoly for South Sudan was underpinned by a strategic partnership with Kenya Railways, which had given it access to the Nairobi Inland Container Depot connected to the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR).
Portside, on the other hand, had successfully pitched its adjacent land holdings and willingness to build an island berth at its own cost as justification for being handed the grain facility without an open tender.
For the Joho family, analysts say, the ongoing legal and policy shifts represent more than just business turbulence; they mark an existential test.
From dominating the port’s South Sudan trade to positioning themselves as the next big players in bulk grain logistics, the family’s blueprint has been systematically dismantled.
