High Court Petition Seeks to Suspend Resignations of EPRA, KPC and Energy Officials Amid Coercion Claims
The High Court is expected to give directions on the urgent application, which could determine whether the status quo will be preserved as the broader constitutional questions are heard and determined.
Isaiah Biwott Kangwony (left) with his advocate Nathan Muhatia addressing the media at the Eldoret High Court following the filing of an urgent constitutional petition challenging the resignation of senior energy sector officials.
A constitutional petition has been filed at the High Court in Eldoret seeking to suspend the implementation of controversial resignations by four senior officials in Kenya’s energy sector, citing alleged coercion, procedural impropriety, and abuse of power.
The petition, filed under a certificate of urgency by Isaiah Biwott Kangwony through his lawyer Nathan Muhatia, asks the court to issue conservatory orders halting the legal effect of the exits and any subsequent administrative actions.
The officials at the centre of the dispute are former Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) Director General Daniel Kiptoo Bargoria, former Petroleum Principal Secretary Mohamed Liban, Kenya Pipeline Company Managing Director Joe Sang, and Deputy Director of Petroleum Joseph Wafula.
In the application, Biwott argues that unless the court intervenes urgently, the resignations—described as “impugned”—will be fully implemented, paving the way for replacement appointments, leadership transitions, and possible restructuring within key energy institutions.
Arrests Preceded Resignations
Court documents outline a sequence of events beginning April 2, 2026, when the four officials were arrested by officers from the National Police Service and the Directorate of Criminal Investigations following the launch of a government probe into the petroleum supply chain.
The inquiry, announced on April 4, 2026, was framed as a matter of national importance, touching on energy security and governance within strategic state institutions.
The petitioner states that the officials were held in police custody in Nairobi before being released on bond on April 7, 2026. However, it is during this period that the contested resignations allegedly occurred.
According to filings, the resignation letters were authored and transmitted on April 4—while the officials were either in custody or shortly thereafter—raising serious concerns about whether the decisions were made voluntarily.
Questions Over Legality and Process
The petition challenges both the authenticity and the process through which the resignations were handled, pointing to what it describes as a lack of transparency and due diligence by the respective boards.
It is alleged that the boards moved swiftly to receive and accept the resignations on the same day they were submitted, without clear evidence of proper deliberations, quorum, or verification of the officials’ consent.
The petitioner further questions the absence of publicly available records, including board minutes, internal communications, and confirmation of how the resignation letters were transmitted.
Court Orders Sought
Among the orders sought are directives to suspend any ongoing or planned administrative actions stemming from the resignations, including appointments of successors and handover processes.
The petitioner is also asking the court to compel state agencies to preserve and disclose critical records, including resignation letters, email metadata, police custody records, occurrence book entries, and board resolutions.
Additionally, the application seeks to bar authorities from treating the resignations as valid or taking steps to formalize them pending the determination of the case.
Matter of Public Interest
Biwott argues that the case raises fundamental constitutional issues, including the protection of public officers from coercion, adherence to fair administrative action, and accountability in the management of strategic national institutions.
He maintains that the dispute has far-reaching implications for the country’s petroleum supply chain, economic stability, and public confidence in governance.
The High Court is expected to give directions on the urgent application, which could determine whether the status quo will be preserved as the broader constitutional questions are heard and determined.
About Author
