The Kenyan government recently reinstated mandatory rail haulage for cargo moving from the Port of Mombasa to inland destinations. This decision responds directly to severe congestion at the facility. Specifically, officials attribute the gridlock to high cargo volumes and technical disruptions. While authorities view this move as a necessary logistical intervention, it has already reignited a fierce legal debate. In fact, this policy shift mirrors previous directives that sparked widespread protests and resulted in court rulings against the state.
Initially, authorities implemented mandatory rail haulage after truck movements ground to a halt last Friday. An upgrade to the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) systems caused this massive gridlock. As a result, the outage left hundreds of vehicles stranded in queues stretching over three kilometers. To clear the backlog, the KRA and the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) now prioritize rail transfers to the Naivasha Inland Container Depot (ICD). Consequently, this directive targets long-haul cargo bound for Uganda, Rwanda, South Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Furthermore, KRA Commissioner-General Humphrey Wattanga explained that prioritizing the Naivasha ICD prevents a total collapse of efficiency in Mombasa.
However, the return of mandatory rail haulage met swift and vocal condemnation from the Kenya Transporters Association (KTA). These stakeholders argue that the directive is anti-competitive and economically damaging. Therefore, thousands of businesses operating along the Mombasa–Malaba corridor face potential losses. KTA chairman Newton Wang’oo voiced strong opposition, stating that the move lacks commercial justification. He argues that poor planning and vessel scheduling failures cause the current congestion. Moreover, Wang’oo noted that forcing transit cargo to the Naivasha ICD will not solve empty-container evacuation issues.
The controversy surrounding mandatory rail haulage is deeply rooted in recent legal history. For instance, in November 2020, a five-judge bench of the High Court quashed a similar order. The court ruled that the mandate lacked sufficient public participation. Despite this legal precedent, officials have revisited the policy as an emergency measure. In 2019, similar notices triggered massive protests in Mombasa. Because residents feared significant job losses in the road transport sector, the move faced heavy resistance. By reintroducing mandatory rail haulage in early 2026, the government risks new litigation that could halt its logistics strategies.
Additionally, a prolonged downtime of the Integrated Customs Management System (iCMS) caused this immediate “short-term pain.” Although the KRA planned a 36-hour maintenance window starting February 7, 2026, the platform remained unstable for days. This technical failure forced a system reboot. Consequently, it left drivers like John Kidasi stranded without hope of clearance. Because the system remained slow after restoration, the government used mandatory rail haulage to drain excess containers quickly.
To manage the crisis, authorities will move containers sitting at the port for over 21 days to external stations. Along with this, they plan to maximize Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) use to both Nairobi and Naivasha. While officials describe these steps as essential, the logistics community remains highly skeptical. They believe that without reliable KRA systems, mandatory rail haulage is merely a temporary fix. Ultimately, the balance between state mandates and private-sector freedom remains incredibly delicate for the Kenyan economy.