CAK denies approving Portland Cement-Kalahari deal

CAK Protection Director Amenya Omari with his team before the Trade Committee on the sale of Portland Cement shares to Kalahari Cement at County Hall, Nairobi on October 2, 2025. [Elvis Ogina, Standard]

The Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK) has clarified that it did not approve the acquisition of shares in East Africa Portland Cement Company (EAPC) by Kalahari Cement Ltd, stating it lacks the legal mandate to do so.

Appearing before a National Assembly’s Trade, Industry and Cooperatives Committee, yesterday, top CAK officials said their role in the transaction was purely advisory, and that the law does not grant the Authority powers to approve or block such acquisitions.

Appearing before the Committee, lawmakers questioned why the Authority appeared to have abdicated its regulatory role and relied on questionable data to issue an advisory in support of the deal.

MPs also expressed concern over the lack of thorough due diligence before CAK offered guidance on the transaction.

“Where two partners collude to buy shares below the market value, doesn’t that concern you as the competition authority?” asked Gichugu MP Robert Gichimu. “Doesn’t it worry you that selling shares at half the trading value on the NSE could dilute the value of government and public ownership in Portland Cement?”

Committee Chairperson Benard Shinali pressed the Authority to explain why it allowed the share sale to proceed through a private deal, effectively blocking EAPC’s right to buy back the shares, potentially putting the livelihood of employees at stake.

“When the management of EAPC appeared before us, they said that they were not aware of the shares by Holcim to Kalahari and that if they knew, they had the money to buy the shares back. Why favour an overseas company?” Shinali asked.

Aldai MP Maryanne Keitany also questioned why the authority allowed the deal to go through knowing very well that it would potentially hand Kalahari dominance on the cement company, further emboldening it to veto any decisions of the Board at EAPC.

“The sale will see Kalahari possess 41.7 per cent of the shares at EAPC yet you claim that that they will not have dominance. But doesn’t it mean that they will have the power to countermand decisions by the board?” queried the lawmaker.

But in response, Amenya Omari, the director in charge of competition and consumer protection at CAK, clarified that the authority had no such powers to approve or decline the acquisition of shares.

“We did not approve the sale of the shares to Kalahari. Ours was just an advisory role. There was no provision in the Act that allowed us to intervene in that transaction and all we did was to offer advice to the parties involved,” said Omari. “That issue falls outside the jurisdiction of CAK.”