Eastleigh collapse: Who is accountable when Nairobi’s buildings fail?
Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja
The rubble in Eastleigh is not just concrete and steel — it is evidence of a regulatory system that waited for disaster before asking whether a 12-storey building was safe
By Levis Wangamati
The collapse of a multistorey building under construction in Nairobi’s Eastleigh neighbourhood on Friday has placed construction safety, regulatory enforcement and public accountability at the centre of Kenya’s urban development debate, with investigators yet to establish the cause as rescue teams continued searching for survivors beneath the debris.
Eastleigh is one of Nairobi’s most commercially active neighbourhoods, where businesses, residential developments and construction projects compete for every available metre of space. The economic energy that sustains thousands of livelihoods in this district is visible on every street corner. So, too, is the risk that accumulates when construction and occupation overlap without adequate safeguards. For traders, workers, residents and passers-by, building safety is not an abstract regulatory matter. It is a question of whether they return home at the end of the day.
Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja confirmed that the building had received county construction approval but did not hold an occupation certificate. He further disclosed that ground-floor shops were operating without the required certification, making their presence in the structure unlawful at the time of the collapse. The definitive cause of the failure had not been established when these reports went to press. Those details must be established through evidence, not images of wreckage or political statements. The public deserves answers grounded in fact, and any rush to assign blame before investigators have completed their work would undermine the credibility of the accountability process that must follow.
A construction approval is not a guarantee of safety. It permits development subject to applicable conditions and standards. It does not confirm that a building is complete, structurally sound or fit for occupation. An occupation certificate serves that distinct purpose — it signals that a completed structure has met the necessary conditions before people are permitted to use it. That shops were open on the ground floor while construction continued above them is a fact that investigators must examine with the seriousness it demands. Who authorised or permitted that occupation? What inspections had been conducted up to that point? Did the approved plans match the structure that was actually being built? These are not peripheral questions. They are the core of what happened in Eastleigh on Friday.
County governments cannot treat building regulation as an administrative function that ends the moment a permit is issued. Their responsibilities extend through the entire construction process — ensuring compliance with approved designs, enforcing construction standards and responding decisively to violations. Developers and contractors carry parallel legal and professional obligations. Where the investigation establishes negligence, misconduct or criminal conduct, the law must be applied without regard for the status or connections of those found responsible.
Kenya’s urban centres are expanding at a pace that strains every system designed to manage that growth. Population pressure, business investment and housing demand have driven developers to build higher, transforming skylines across Nairobi and other cities. That growth generates employment, supports commerce and broadens the tax base. But its benefits become indefensible when the safety of the people who occupy, work in or simply walk past those buildings is treated as secondary to a project’s completion schedule or profit margin.
A building is not merely a financial asset measured by its floor count or rental yield. It is a structure on which human beings depend for shelter, employment and commerce. When it collapses, the damage is not contained to concrete and steel. Families lose relatives. Workers are injured or killed. Traders lose stock, income and the premises from which their livelihoods depend. Emergency responders enter dangerous conditions to look for survivors. The ripple effects of a single structural failure are wide, deep and long-lasting.
The investigation must answer specific questions with documented precision. Who owns the property? Which professionals designed and supervised the construction, and which contractor executed the work? Were the approved structural designs followed throughout the build? Were the required inspections conducted, recorded and filed? Did the building undergo alterations, and if so, were those changes properly authorised? Were any earlier warnings or complaints made to the relevant authorities, and how were they handled? Each of these questions must be answered through construction records, technical assessments, witness accounts and verifiable physical evidence.
Structural failure can involve multiple contributing factors, and determining responsibility requires qualified, independent investigation. The fact that a building collapsed does not, by itself, establish cause or prove that a specific individual committed an offence. Transparency must therefore proceed alongside fairness and due process. The public should be kept informed of the investigation’s progress, and if misconduct is established, the relevant legal processes must follow without delay or interference.
Developers have legitimate interests in completing projects and generating returns. Traders need premises and tenants need affordable space. But commercial pressure cannot override safety requirements. The cost of delaying occupation to satisfy inspection requirements is not comparable — not remotely — to the human and economic consequences of a building coming down on the people inside it.
Effective regulation does not obstruct responsible development. It protects the public while creating a predictable, fair environment for investment. Its purpose is to identify and correct risks before they kill, not to arrive at the scene after rescue teams are already digging through rubble. That requires adequate staffing, technical expertise, reliable records and effective coordination between county departments and national institutions. It requires inspectors who are present throughout the construction process and authorities willing to stop work when violations are found, regardless of who is applying pressure to look the other way.
The Eastleigh collapse should also prompt authorities to examine other buildings under construction and in occupation across Nairobi. A credible risk-based inspection programme should prioritise structures with identifiable warning signs, unresolved compliance concerns or other credible safety questions. Where immediate danger is established, protective action must follow under the law. Every other county in Kenya should draw the same lesson. Urbanisation is accelerating nationwide, and local authorities must ensure that building standards keep pace with the cranes rising on their skylines.
Once the emergency phase in Eastleigh concludes and survivors and families have received the support they need, attention must turn fully to findings and reform. Authorities must establish the facts, explain any failures and identify the specific measures required to prevent a recurrence. Where gaps in inspection, approval or enforcement are found, corrective action must be measurable, publicly reported and subject to ongoing scrutiny.
A city’s progress cannot be measured only by the height of its buildings. It must also be measured by the strength of the systems protecting every person who lives, works and walks beneath them.
Similar Posts by The Mt Kenya Times:
- Mt Kenya Times ePAPER October 26, 2026
- Sakaja challenges Kamukunji police over Eastleigh suspect bail
- Muturi demands binding livestreaming rules for 2027 polls to prevent repeat of 2022 chaos
- NTSA calls for road safety to be declared a national disaster after 24 die in Mtito Andei crash
- Ruku turns on Waiguru over deputy president ambitions: ‘That seat is not being contested for’
About the Author
