Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway (SGR), one of the country’s largest infrastructure investments, is facing renewed scrutiny following claims that the government paid approximately KSh117 billion more than necessary for its construction.
The allegations raise serious questions about the cost of the railway, the procurement process, the role of government officials and contractors, and whether Kenyan taxpayers received value for money.
An important distinction for accurate reporting: an audit finding of possible overpayment or procurement irregularities does not, by itself, establish that individuals committed criminal fraud. The underlying World Bank report and its exact findings must be distinguished from subsequent media interpretations.
What the World Bank actually found
According to the World Bank’s latest Kenya Economic Update, reported on November 4, 2026, Kenya could have saved approximately US$900 million, equivalent to about KSh117 billion, on the initial construction costs of the Mombasa–Nairobi railway if the project had been delivered at the same cost per kilometre as Tanzania’s railway.
The World Bank attributes at least 30% of this potential saving to governance-related weaknesses, rather than technical or geographical differences.
Three major concerns were identified:
1. Non-competitive procurement: The preference for direct contracting instead of competitive tendering raised concerns about whether the government secured the mo
st economical construction deal.
2. Land speculation: Land acquisition for the railway reportedly involved inflated costs and questionable transactions.
3. Suspected fraud in land compensation: The report points to irregularities involving land titling, property valuation and compensation payments.
The findings suggest that weaknesses in public procurement and land administration contributed significantly to the high cost of the railway.
