As the country engages its top gears in readiness for the Vision 2030 industrialisation goal, attention is fast shifting to the quality of service offered by the State agencies charged with regulating investments.

Of late, the efficacy of the National Environment Management Authority (Nema), the Kenya Bureau of Standards (Kebs) and Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) have come into sharp focus against the backdrop of rising tide of the entrepreneurial culture.

For a country like Kenya that has been pursuing big (and mostly foreign) investments to power its economic growth for the last three decades, the role of these regulatory agencies to consumers is key to growth.

Tilted competition

Within the manufacturing community, Eveready's CEO, Mr Steve Smith, has complained about the inability of relevant authorities to rein in importers of counterfeits, which has tilted competition against local industrialists.

But the Industrialisation ministry has since moved to seal the legal vacuum by reviving the Anti-Counterfeiting Bill, which according to the minister, Henry Kosgey, will strengthen Kebs and KRA in discharging their duties.

"I know Kebs has highly trained staff and given the kind of facilities and equipment that I have seen today, I really don't understand why substandard commodities should ever be found within our borders unless there is some sort of collusion," Mr Kosgey said after a recent tour of the Kebs facilities, among them a state-of-the-art radiation centre.

On May 30, a three-judge Bench of the Court of Appeal, Justices Philip Tunoi, Samuel Bosire and Joyce Aluoch gave a ruling that effectively faulted the way KRA has been handling the issue of duty-free sugar imports into the country.

In the case, two of the 5,000 sugar importers recruited by the industry regulator, the Kenya Sugar Board, to ship into the country part of the 200,000 metric tonnes of the commodity from Comesa, moved to court to compel the taxman to release their consignment which had docked at the Mombasa Port last year in compliance with the gazette notice published by the KSB.

But KRA ,which had extended the February 1 date by one month, held the traders' consignment on arrival to demand duty on the imports, saying they had arrived before the commencement of the duty-free grace period.

According to the former Law Society of Kenya chairman, Mr Ahmednasir Abdulahi, upholding of the KSB's position by the highest court on the land in what has been a long and protracted turf war between the two government regulatory agencies, is likely to cost KRA as over 50 related suits are pending in courts. In the suits, traders are claiming billions of shillings in damages from the taxman.

But of the government agencies, Nema risks earning the dubious distinction of being the watchdog with a penchant to ignore public sentiment, in the process getting the flak from the group it is supposed to protect.

Mr Peter Kinya, an Environmental Studies lecturer at Kenyatta University, blames defaults on the undue influence of the Nema's board of directors. "The authority has best technical experts in town, but its management is under siege from a conservative board that believes economic development overrides all other considerations," he said.

Mr Kinya represents a growing perception that Nema applies its mandate selectively in favour of big businesses under an unwritten rule of 'development at all costs.'

For instance, the fishermen and boat operators at Lake Naivasha believe that the environment regulator has, for many years, failed to police the sustainable use of the lakes waters by the multi-billion shilling horticulture industry. In Kwale, Tiomin Resources Kenya is another memorable project that has seen communities reject the regulator's verdict.

"We have not compromised our public participation principle but some people may not like our final decisions, which are usually the middle ground after considering economic development, social dynamics and conservation needs," says Ms Ruth Musembi, Nema's head of communication.

Ms Musembi adds that the authority only gives a project a go-ahead after reviewing contributions of the line ministries and the technical advisory committees.

Strong opposition

But the manner in which the authority dispenses its services has come under intense scrutiny in the last few months. Three projects seeking to secure a clean bill of health from Nema have attracted strong opposition from the community.

At Kitengela in Nairobi, residents have rejected a cement plant proposed by Catic of China on the grounds that it would pollute the residential area. Nema has since advised the firm to look for an alternative site.

Uncertainty has also engulfed Xhianghui International Kenya, a firm that has already built a battery recycling plant in Nakuru after neighbours, including the Pyrethrum Board of Kenya and several food and animal feed manufacturers, expressed fears that the lead that it has proposed to handle could spill into premises and endanger lives.

The proposed Sh24 billion Tana Integrated Sugar Project is the latest subject of a tug of war between Nema, on the one hand, and the community and green activists on the other, who have faulted it on effects to the ecosystem.

The tourism sector has also been protesting that their environmental impact assessment requirements are costly and cumbersome.