Dangote’s Lamu Refinery Deal Under Scrutiny as Kenyan Party Demands Contract, Ownership Disclosure

A proposed refinery and petrochemicals project linked to Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote in Kenya is facing growing scrutiny, with the Thirdway Alliance Party demanding that the government disclose the full contractual and ownership arrangements behind the multibillion-dollar investment.

In a letter dated October 2, 2026, and addressed to Kenya’s Attorney General, Dorcas Agik Oduor, the party demanded access to the agreement between the Kenyan government and Dangote East Africa Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals SEZ, as well as documents capable of establishing who ultimately owns and controls the project.

The demand raises broader questions about the transparency of a major foreign investment, the extent of government commitments to the project, and whether Kenyan taxpayers could ultimately bear any financial or contractual obligations arising from the deal.

The letter, signed by Thirdway Alliance leader Dr Ekuru Aukot, invokes Article 35 of Kenya’s Constitution and Sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Access to Information Act, 2016, arguing that citizens have a constitutional right to examine agreements entered into by the government.

What exactly has Kenya agreed to?

At the centre of the party’s request is a demand for the complete agreement or contract executed between the Government of Kenya or any associated public entity and Dangote Group or its project vehicle, Dangote Refineries Limited SEZ.

Thirdway Alliance is seeking not only the principal agreement but also execution copies, schedules, side letters, amendments and other documents that may have altered the original terms.

The party also wants the government to clarify the status of the project if no final agreement has been executed.

“Should a definitive agreement not yet be executed,” the letter states, the government should disclose its present status, provide existing draft agreements and identify approvals already on record.

That demand goes to a fundamental question surrounding the project: what precisely has the Kenyan government committed to and on whose behalf?

Why is the ownership structure being questioned?

Thirdway Alliance has also demanded detailed information on the ownership of Dangote East Africa Refinery and Petrochemicals SEZ.

The party wants the government to disclose the beneficial owners of the project, its directors and CR12 documents relating to locally incorporated corporate shareholders.

It is also seeking corresponding corporate registry records for foreign shareholders, together with Memoranda and Articles of Association or equivalent documents and information identifying the beneficial owners behind those entities.

The requests could provide a clearer picture of the corporate structure behind the proposed Lamu investment and establish whether the project's publicly identified ownership corresponds with the individuals and entities that ultimately control it.

Parliament’s role comes under scrutiny

Another significant issue raised by the party is whether Kenya’s Parliament has considered or approved the project.

Thirdway Alliance has asked the Attorney General to disclose whether the agreement has been presented to Parliament, debated, approved or ratified.

It is requesting the relevant dates, Hansard records, committee reports, resolutions and approval documents.

If parliamentary approval was not obtained, the party wants the government to explain whether such approval is legally required and whether the project falls within Kenya’s public private partnership framework or could create public financial liabilities.

That question could prove consequential if the project involves government guarantees, incentives, land arrangements, infrastructure commitments or other obligations extending beyond the private investor.

Party challenges Ruto’s response to scrutiny

The demand also follows what Thirdway Alliance describes as recent comments by President William Ruto dismissing calls for information about the Dangote project.

The party alleges that Ruto referred to citizens demanding information as “matapeli” a Swahili term commonly used for con artists or fraudsters and accused them of attempting to extort the investor.

Thirdway Alliance rejected that characterization, arguing that scrutiny of public contracts is a constitutional right rather than an attempt to obstruct investment.

“While foreign investment that advances Kenya’s interests is welcome, the public remains fully entitled to scrutinize any contractual commitments made on its behalf,” the party said.

The political dispute therefore extends beyond Dangote's investment itself. It raises a larger question about the boundary between attracting foreign capital and subjecting government-backed deals to public scrutiny.

‘Kenya is not President Ruto’s private company’

In its letter, Thirdway Alliance directly invoked the Attorney General’s constitutional responsibilities, arguing that the office should advise the President on the government's obligations concerning access to public information.

“Kenya is a constitutional republic, not President Ruto’s personal or private company,” the party said.

It called on the Attorney General, as the government’s principal legal adviser under Article 156 of the Constitution, to ensure that its information request was processed.

The party gave the Attorney General 21 days to respond, citing Section 9(1) of the Access to Information Act.

It warned that a refusal or failure to respond could constitute a deemed rejection under Section 9(6), potentially opening the way for further legal action.

Thirdway Alliance also said it could pursue proceedings if evidence established that President Ruto personally directed or maintained what it considers an unlawful refusal to disclose the information.

Dangote’s Nigeria problem adds another layer

The Kenyan controversy comes against the backdrop of a much larger debate over Dangote’s investments in Nigeria, particularly the country’s chronic electricity shortfall.

In a post on X, Aukot questioned why Dangote was seeking to develop a refinery in Kenya while Nigeria continues to struggle with inadequate power generation.

“Btw, Nigeria has serious power problem. Why can’t #Dangote fix his country first before coming to Kenya re oil refinery? We reject this deal,” he wrote.

The criticism, however, comes at a time when Dangote Group itself says it is preparing to commit substantial capital to Nigeria’s power sector.

In May, Dangote said the group was moving into power generation and targeting as much as 20,000 megawatts.

He made the disclosure during an interview with Makhtar Diop, managing director of the International Finance Corporation.

“We are now going into power 20,000 megawatts,” Dangote said.

The planned investment forms part of a broader expansion agenda that includes fertiliser production, liquefied natural gas and port development.

A billionaire investing in power while expanding abroad

Nigeria currently produces only a fraction of its installed electricity generation capacity, with actual generation typically far below the more than 13,000MW installed capacity.

Dangote has increasingly identified unreliable electricity as one of the structural obstacles to African industrialisation.

In September, he told Al Jazeera that Dangote Group planned to invest more than $10 billion in the power sector, arguing that inadequate electricity supply and inconsistent government policies discourage investment across the continent.

He said the group was even considering redirecting capital from some ventures, including steel, towards electricity generation.

“We want to invest over $10bn alone in power,” he said.

Dangote also pointed to the scale of Africa’s electricity deficit, saying more than 600 million Africans remain without access to electricity.

From scepticism to a 650,000 barrel a day refinery

Dangote’s defence of his expansion strategy is also rooted in the experience of his flagship refinery in Nigeria.

He has recalled that the project faced intense scepticism from its inception.

The refinery, estimated to have cost about $20 billion, has since commenced production and has a stated capacity of approximately 650,000 barrels per day.

Its development transformed Dangote from a businessman heavily associated with cement and manufacturing into one of Africa’s most consequential players in energy and infrastructure.

The proposed Kenyan project would represent another major expansion of that footprint.

But the questions now being raised in Kenya are less about Dangote’s capacity to execute large projects and more about the terms under which such an expansion would take place.

The questions Kenya must answer

Thirdway Alliance says it recognises the potential economic benefits of the Lamu project but argues that economic promises cannot substitute for transparency.

The party has called for the agreement and all material government commitments to be published on an official government website.

It has also warned against what it describes as opaque arrangements that could ultimately impose costs on Kenyan citizens.

The controversy therefore leaves several questions hanging over the proposed investment:

• What are the precise terms of the agreement between Kenya and Dangote’s project entity?

• Has a definitive agreement actually been executed?

• What incentives, guarantees, land or infrastructure commitments has the Kenyan government offered?

• Does the project create any direct or contingent liability for the Kenyan state?

• Who are the ultimate beneficial owners behind the project?

• Has Parliament reviewed or approved the arrangement?

• What role, if any, will Kenyan taxpayers play in financing or supporting the development?

• And why has the government not yet made the relevant contractual documents publicly accessible?

Until those questions are answered with documentary evidence, the debate over Dangote’s Lamu refinery is likely to remain as much about transparency and public accountability as it is about foreign investment and economic development.

The Kenyan government’s response to the information request could therefore become an important test of how Nairobi handles public scrutiny of major private-sector investments involving government commitments.

Globalvoice will continue to track the project, the government’s response and any documents released concerning the proposed Lamu refinery and petrochemicals development.