
In its court submissions, CRBC – acting as the project contractor – said the government should not halt public infrastructure projects through court interference. It added that the Executive and Parliament control decisions about how the government allocates resources for national infrastructure.
CRBC further argued that the petition challenges government policy on how it finances the railway through the Railway Development Levy Fund (RDLF). It said those issues do not belong before the courts because the company considers them non-justiciable and outside the court’s authority to decide.
The company also said it signed a valid and binding commercial contract with Kenya Railways Corporation and that it has already invested substantial capital in the project, including by mobilizing heavy machinery, technical personnel, and construction resources.
CRBC said that stopping the project would expose the government to major contractual liabilities and compensation claims, which would ultimately place the burden on taxpayers.
The company added that petitioners, including Senator Okiya Omtatah and others, failed to present credible evidence of any actual or imminent breach of constitutional rights.
CRBC argued that many of the petition’s claims rely on media coverage, speculative economic forecasts, and assumptions about future public debt and taxation. The company said those grounds fall short of the evidentiary standard needed in constitutional cases.
CRBC also contested allegations that the project suffered from insufficient public participation. It said earlier legal proceedings already addressed similar concerns about stakeholder engagement and environmental approvals, which the Environment and Land Court had previously considered and resolved.
According to CRBC, work on the Riruta–Ngong railway is already about 40% complete, and major civil works have progressed along the corridor.
The contractor warned that pausing the project at this stage would leave critical infrastructure unfinished, increase safety and environmental risks, cause job losses, and waste billions of shillings already spent on development.
CRBC maintained that the public interest supports completing the railway. It said the project aims to reduce traffic congestion and deliver efficient mass transit services within the Nairobi metropolitan area.
The company accused the petitioners of trying to replace government policy decisions with their own preferences. It argued that debates about whether to invest in rail or road infrastructure should stay with policymakers, not the judiciary.
CRBC therefore asked the High Court to dismiss the petition and award costs, stating that the project proceeds lawfully and that stopping it would cause serious economic and public harm.
The petition challenging the Riruta–Ngong Commuter Meter Gauge Railway Project remains pending before the High Court.