Hour of reckoning for Kenya’s power contracts

On the surface, they seemed like a way to expand supply and meet rising demand. But in reality, many of these contracts tilted heavily in favour of the private producers and left the public carrying the cost.

In the year ending June 2024, Kenya Power bought 59 percent of its electricity from KenGen, the State generator. Yet KenGen only received 40 percent of the total payments, about Sh49.4 billion.

By contrast, IPPs supplied just 41 percent of the electricity but collected 60 percent of the money. Put simply, KenGen supplied most of the power, while IPPs took most of the cash.

The latest half-year results up to December 2024 show that this imbalance is still weighing on the company. Kenya Power spent Sh71.4 billion on buying electricity in just six months.

The stronger shilling reduced some costs, and renewable energy purchases rose to 6,603 gigawatt hours (GWh) from 6,199 GWh a year earlier, but the basic problem remains. The share of money paid out is still far higher than the share of electricity delivered by IPPs.

A unit from a private producer averaged Sh21, while KenGen charged less than half that, at about Sh10. Even in geothermal power, which is considered one of the cheapest and most reliable renewable sources, IPPs were charging more than double what KenGen billed.

The pattern continued in thermal generation, whese producers charged almost Sh44 per unit against KenGen’s Sh29. Unfortunately, the contracts include what is known as a take or pay clause, which means Kenya Power is required to pay, even when the electricity is not consumed. These are rigid contracts that load risk onto the public.

For ordinary citizens, all this translates into one simple outcome: high electricity bills. But the story is bigger than bills. It is a story about governance.

When power purchase contracts are signed behind closed doors and when governments lack the technical expertise or bargaining strength to negotiate on equal footing with private companies, the outcome is almost always the same: the public carries the burden.

Read: Parliamentary approvals of PPAs will provide critical oversight

Kenya’s electricity story shows just how costly weak governance can be. When we talk about Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) principles, the spotlight almost always falls on the environment or social concerns. We speak about climate change, carbon emissions, job creation, and diversity. Governance is usually mentioned last, like a supporting act.

Yet governance is the foundation stone that holds everything together. Without it, environmental promises and social pledges are a weak foundation. Governance is about trust, fairness, accountability, and the ability of institutions to deliver in the public interest. Without good governance, everything else begins to crack.

Governance is not about paperwork or ticking compliance boxes. It is about the ability to safeguard the public interest. It is about ensuring that contracts, policies, and decisions are fair, transparent, and accountable. Kenya’s electricity contracts demonstrate what happens when governance is treated as an afterthought.

This is not a uniquely Kenyan problem. Across Africa, governments often find themselves at the negotiating table with multinational corporations that bring entire teams of lawyers, financial analysts, and consultants.

Governments, by contrast, are sometimes represented by overstretched officials with little specialist support. The imbalance is obvious, and the results are predictable: contracts that lock countries into expensive obligations, expose them to hidden risks, and leave them with little flexibility when circumstances change.

The good news is that African governments are not without options. There are institutions created precisely to help them navigate these complex negotiations. One of the strongest is the Africa Legal Support Facility, hosted by the African Development Bank.

The Facility provides governments with access to world-class legal and financial experts, helps them identify risks in contracts, and builds their capacity to negotiate better deals in the future. It is not the only option available. Governments can also draw on regional development banks, international partnerships, or even strengthen their use of local legal and technical expertise.

The problem is that many governments do not use these resources as much as they should. Deals are rushed through in the name of urgency or expediency, and the result is decades-long obligations that weigh down public finances and burden citizens. Kenya’s experience with its power purchase agreements shows why this approach is unsustainable.

As the country prepares to lift the freeze and negotiate new power deals, there is a chance to reset. This is the moment to insist on transparency, to involve stakeholders, to publish the terms, and to use every tool available to strengthen the hand of the state. Governance cannot be an afterthought tucked at the end of ESG.

Citizens pay the price when governance is weak, but they also reap the rewards when governance is strong. Africa has the tools to make sure contracts are fairer and better balanced. The challenge is simple: use them.

The writer is the founder and CEO of P&L Consulting Group, a Pan-African advisory firm