Housing PS Charles Hinga Entangled in Sh 2B Tender Scam

Procurement watchdog finds Principal Secretary illegally interfered with Sh1.93 billion Machakos housing project tender

Housing and Urban Development Principal Secretary Charles Hinga finds himself at the center of a major procurement scandal after Kenya’s procurement watchdog ruled that he illegally meddled in a Sh1.93 billion tender for an affordable housing project in Machakos County.

The Public Procurement Regulatory Authority’s (PPRA) Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) has found that the PS usurped the powers of the tenders’ evaluation committee by terminating a tender and purporting to conduct due diligence checks on one of the bidders.

In a damning ruling delivered on June 3, 2025, the PPARB found that Mr. Hinga “unfairly, unlawfully and illegally” disqualified Keddy Enterprises from the tender process and ordered that the procurement process proceed to its lawful conclusion within 30 days.

The controversial tender relates to the construction of 819 housing units under the first phase of the Machakos New City Affordable Housing Programme.

The tender attracted 14 bidders but only two—Padaa Enterprises and Keddy Enterprises—proceeded to the technical evaluation stage after the rest were deemed non-responsive during the initial assessment.

According to Business Registration Services records, Padaa Enterprises is owned by Abdirizak Mohamed Nur while Evangeline Kiende Njeru owns Keddy Enterprises.

The PPARB documents reveal a troubling pattern of interference by PS Hinga, who repeatedly overruled the professional recommendations of the evaluation committee and procurement experts.

The evaluation committee, supported by two independent experts, had twice recommended that Keddy Enterprises be awarded the tender based on their Sh1.93 billion bid.

However, Mr. Hinga rejected these professional recommendations without substantive justification.

In one instance, the PPRA board quotes Mr. Hinga’s letter to the evaluation committee stating: “Ms Keddy faked documents in Konza.

This is a discredited bidder that should be blacklisted.”

However, the board noted it had no sight of how Mr. Hinga reached this conclusion or any documentation supporting his decision.

The scandal deepened when it emerged that PS Hinga conducted his own unauthorized investigation into Keddy Enterprises, writing letters to multiple institutions without following proper procurement procedures.

On March 27, 2025, Mr. Hinga wrote to the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission CEO requesting an investigation into Keddy.

On the same day, he dispatched another letter to Equity Bank Kenya’s management questioning how the lender issued a Sh3 billion credit line “to a company that has only credit lines of only Sh180 million.”

These letters followed an earlier communication to the Kenya Revenue Authority in December 2024, asking about Keddy’s tax compliance status.

KRA responded on January 10, 2025, confirming that Keddy had filed all required returns as of January 2, 2025, with only an ongoing tax dispute on previous assessments pending before a tribunal.

The situation escalated when Mr. Hinga, through letters dated March 30, 2025, informed all bidders that the tender had been cancelled for being “non-responsive,” despite the evaluation committee’s recommendations to the contrary.

Crucially, Mr. Hinga failed to write to the PPRA explaining specific reasons for the termination as required under procurement laws.

Head of supply chain management John Maina, who had provided expert advice supporting Keddy’s award, told PPRA that when the committee sought reasons from Mr. Hinga for terminating the tender, the PS said he was “not comfortable with the manner in which the results of the evaluation process” went.

Internal correspondence reveals further irregularities. The board’s documents show that Mr. Hinga appeared confused about the tender process, at one point questioning why it was being terminated when he thought it had been awarded to Padaa Enterprises.

The PPARB noted: “We note that vide internal memo dated 26th March 2025, the Head Supply Chain Management, Mr John Maina forwarded to the 1st respondent (Mr Hinga) letters of notification for termination of the procurement process… where the 1st respondent questions why the tender was being terminated since he thought it was awarded to Padaa.”

The PPARB concluded that Mr. Hinga had no authority to declare Keddy’s tender non-responsive, stating: “The 1st respondent (Mr Hinga) does not have any powers to declare the applicant’s (Keddy) tender non-responsive as this is a role reserved for the evaluation committee.”

The board further noted that if Mr. Hinga possessed detrimental information about Keddy, he should have brought it to the evaluation committee’s attention rather than rejecting the bid and then seeking supporting evidence.

Charles Hinga is the principal secretary of the State Department for Housing and Urban Development in Kenya. He is a Chartered Accountant and holds a Bachelor of Commerce (Accounting) degree from Kenyatta University and a Bachelor of Accounting Science (Honors) from the University of South Africa.

Hinga was appointed to drive Kenya’s ambitious affordable housing agenda under President William Ruto’s administration.

However, his tenure has been marked by controversy, particularly around the unpopular housing levy that deducts 1.5% from employees’ salaries.

The PPARB has ordered that the procurement process proceed to its lawful conclusion within 30 days, taking into consideration the board’s findings and the recommendation to award the tender to Keddy Enterprises.

This ruling represents a significant embarrassment for the Housing ministry and raises serious questions about governance and adherence to procurement laws in one of the government’s flagship programs.

The case highlights the importance of maintaining the integrity of public procurement processes and the consequences of political interference in technical evaluations that should be conducted by qualified professionals.

As Kenya continues to grapple with its housing deficit, this scandal underscores the need for transparent and accountable processes in implementing affordable housing projects that are critical to millions of Kenyans seeking decent shelter.