Auditor General flags missing land title deeds in affordable housing projects

The Auditor General’s special audit report on the status of affordable housing projects covering the period from the 2022/2023 financial year to April 30, 2025, has laid bare serious legal gaps that could haunt President William Ruto’s flagship projects in the future.

The report reveals that a number of projects were implemented on community land or land held under customary tenure, while others completely lacked verifiable ownership documentation.

In some cases, the land is owned by county governments, further complicating ownership and legal clarity.

Notably, a total of 269 out of 394 projects, representing 68% of the total projects, lacked the crucial documentation.

They include: 54 affordable housing projects; 4 social housing projects; 125 economic stimulus programme markets; 28 solar high mast floodlight projects; 22 modern market projects; 28 market stalls and sheds; and 8 social and physical infrastructure projects.

Housing Principal Secretary Charles Hinga, who appeared before the National Assembly Public Accounts Committee, said the number of projects with title deeds has since improved, albeit marginally since the audit.

“Of the 394 projects since reviewed by the board, 125 are now confirmed to hold valid documentation. A near 3-fold increase from 48 verified at audit stage,” said PS Hinga.

Still, of the 394 projects, only 14 had title deeds, 9 had letters of allotment, 23 with certificates of search and 2 built on community land; the Auditor General warning of future ownership tussles.

The special audit also established that no formal cost-benefit analysis or project appraisal framework was documented prior to launching the programme; no formal affordability threshold analysis was provided to inform pricing or beneficiary targeting; and some planning assumptions, such as land readiness, private sector investment interest, and financing modalities, lacked adequate documentation.

The Auditor General further observed that while multiple sector studies and diagnostic reports were referenced, they did not culminate in a consolidated feasibility study or comprehensive programme appraisal prior to implementation. The State Department for Housing had requested for the audit.