Kisumu County is staring at a staggering Sh7.2 billion court bill arising from a failed tuck-shop project, with the same City Manager who signed the controversial contract later suspending it, while the county chose not to call him or any other witness when the case went to trial.
On February 27, 2025, Justice Mwanaisha Shariff ordered the Kisumu City Board and the County Government of Kisumu to jointly pay Spacebuster Limited Sh363.33 million for expenses and Sh6.84 billion in projected rental income over 10 years. The principal award stands at Sh7.203 billion, with interest running from April 22, 2022, plus costs.
The contract was signed on December 2, 2020, after Spacebuster won tender CGK/COK/RFP/2020/001 to install and operate at least 6,000 tuck shops at designated sites including Omino Crescent, Maendeleo Market, Uhuru Business Park, Ojino Okew Street and Nyamasaria Bus Park.
Each shop was to generate Sh10,000 monthly, with Sh9,500 going to Spacebuster and Sh500 to the City Board. Crucially, Clause 11.2 required the contracting authority to compensate the company for rent it would have earned for the remainder of the 10-year contract if it caused termination.
Michael Abala Wanga, then acting City Manager, signed the agreement. Just four months later, on March 30, 2021, he suspended it and oversaw demolition of structures. The county accused Spacebuster of putting up structures on a sewer line, occupying ungazetted land and overcharging traders.
Spacebuster’s managing director, Babior Newton Ong’ende, told the court that Wanga had demanded Sh10 million upfront before installation at each designated site. The company refused, after which the contract was suspended. The judge accepted the evidence, while the county did not cross-examine Ong’ende or call a witness.
Justice Shariff subsequently delivered a damning assessment of Wanga’s role, stating that he had knowingly exposed taxpayers to liability because of what the court described as his personal interest. She further stated that a county development project had been sacrificed to “selfish aggrandizement and corruption.”
The county’s failure to defend the claim proved decisive. Although it was eventually granted leave to defend and counterclaim, its advocate later told the court that the defence would neither cross-examine the plaintiff nor call witnesses. The counterclaim consequently collapsed.
The court accepted Spacebuster’s projected calculation of Sh6.84 billion based on 6,000 shops earning Sh9,500 monthly for 10 years, despite evidence that the company had purchased only 465 containers. No deductions were made for vacancies, operating costs or shops that were never constructed.
Enforcement has since advanced. On November 13, 2025, Justice Joe M. Omido granted Spacebuster leave to pursue mandamus proceedings.
The controversy comes against a wider backdrop of legal battles involving Wanga.
In 2019, he was convicted by a Kiambu court over a fraud case involving more than Sh400,000 belonging to the Kenya Medical Laboratory Technicians and Technologists Board. He was sentenced to six months in prison without the option of a fine but appealed. A later civil judgment recorded that he was subsequently acquitted of the fraud counts.
In November 2025, the DPP approved fresh charges following an EACC investigation alleging that Wanga used forged academic and police-clearance documents to obtain the City Manager position. Investigators alleged he presented a C+ KCSE certificate when KNEC records showed a D+, and that he subsequently received Sh8.7 million in salaries and allowances.
He also faced allegations relating to a 2024 trip to Lagos, where prosecutors accused him of using an altered invitation to obtain about Sh283,402 in excess facilitation and including a non-county employee on the delegation.
Those criminal proceedings were eventually withdrawn under Section 87A of the Criminal Procedure Code in April 2026 after the court was told that Wanga had undertaken to settle outstanding obligations to the county. The withdrawal was not an acquittal, and the allegations were never tested at trial.
But those figures pale against the Spacebuster judgment.
Kisumu’s 2025/26 budget stands at Sh16.33 billion, meaning the Sh7.2 billion principal award is equivalent to roughly 44 percent of the entire county budget, about 81 percent of its Sh8.9 billion equitable share and more than the Sh5.96 billion development allocation.
At a 12 percent court interest rate, the accumulated interest from April 2022 is estimated at about Sh3.8 billion, potentially pushing the exposure towards Sh11 billion before additional costs.
The county has continued to question the size and validity of the claim. On September 23, 2026, Finance Executive George Okong’o disputed a figure of about Sh7.1 billion and said the county had raised complaints with the Judicial Service Commission concerning some judges.
Yet the central question remains unanswered: why did the county sign a contract containing such a costly termination clause, suspend it within months, and then fail to put its own witnesses in the box when billions of shillings in public money were at stake?
The residents of Kisumu did not sign Clause 11.2. But they may ultimately be left paying for it.
There's no story that cannot be told. We cover the stories that others don't want to be told, we bring you all the news you need. If you have tips, exposes or any story you need to be told bluntly and all queries write to us [email protected] also find us on Telegram
