- Two petitioners have dragged Mombasa Cement Company and the County Government of Mombasa to the High Court
- The case centres on perimeter walls built at schools, police stations and public spaces along the Coast
- Petitioners argue the walls carry commercial branding visible to the public, raising serious constitutional questions
Two petitioners have filed an urgent constitutional suit at the High Court of Kenya, accusing Mombasa Cement Company Limited of using publicly owned walls to run commercial advertising under the cover of corporate social responsibility.
Source: UGC
The petitioners, Bismillah Centre Self Help Group and Fredrick Odhiambo Ojiro, have named Mombasa Cement Company Limited as the first respondent and the County Government of Mombasa as the second respondent.
The Competition Authority of Kenya has been joined as an interested party.
Through their advocate, Maurice Mkhan, the petitioners filed a Certificate of Urgency, asking the court to treat the matter on a priority basis.
At the heart of the dispute are perimeter walls that Mombasa Cement Company Limited reportedly financed or constructed at various public institutions across the Coastal Region, presenting them as charitable projects.
The institutions include Mbaraki Girls Comprehensive School, the Mama Ngina Drive hawkers' area commonly known as Kachiri, Mombasa Golf Club, the Regional Police Headquarters, Central Police Station, and Changamwe Police Station.
The petitioners contend that these walls prominently display the company's logos, product names, and commercial imagery, including branding for cement, steel, and iron-sheet products, all visible to members of the public passing by.
In their view, the walls function as private advertising platforms rather than genuine philanthropic infrastructure.
Beyond the branding itself, the petitioners raise concerns about fairness and public revenue.
They argue that no transparent or lawful framework governs how Mombasa Cement Company Limited obtained access to these spaces, giving the company a promotional edge over competitors who must pay for advertising on standard commercial terms.
They further allege that the County Government of Mombasa has not demonstrated that it authorised the displays, assessed advertising fees, or received any payments, raising questions about whether public revenue was lawfully administered.
The petition draws on a range of constitutional and statutory provisions.
These include Articles 10, 174, 175(b), 201, 209, and 232 of the Constitution, which collectively demand accountability, transparency, equity, and the prudent management of public funds.
The suit also invokes the Public Finance Management Act, 2012, the County Governments Act, 2012, the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015, and Section 24 of the Competition Act, 2010, which addresses abuse of dominance.
The petitioners are seeking conservatory orders to halt any further advertisements and preserve relevant records while the case is heard.
They argue that without court intervention, additional branding may be placed and documentary evidence could become difficult to trace, undermining the integrity of the proceedings.
They maintain that a prima facie case exists and that the balance of justice favours granting interim relief in the public interest.
Source: TUKO.co.ke