Ruto projects billion Kenya–Tanzania trade milestone in 2026 as ties deepen:
Kenyan President William Samoei Ruto has projected that bilateral trade between Kenya and Tanzania will exceed $ 1 billion (about R17bn) in 2026, signaling strengthening economic ties and rising cross-border investment between East Africa’s two largest economies.
Speaking before Tanzania’s parliament in Dodoma on Tuesday, Ruto said trade between the two countries reached about $ 860 million in 2025, supported by increased private sector activity, improved business conditions and regional integration efforts.
“Kenya and Tanzania are deeply interdependent economies. While the progress we have made is encouraging, it represents only a fraction of what is possible if we fully unlock our shared potential.”
Ruto said investment remained a cornerstone of bilateral relations, with Kenyan firms committing more than $ 1.7bn across strategic sectors such as manufacturing, energy, logistics, agriculture and financial services in Tanzania.
The investments had contributed to job creation, technology transfer and the development of local industrial capabilities.
At the same time, Tanzanian investment in Kenya had grown to an estimated $ 336m, reflecting a gradual shift toward more balanced economic engagement. Companies such as Taifa Gas, Amsons Group and Lake Gas had expanded into the Kenyan market over the past three years, particularly in the energy and gas distribution sectors.
“With ongoing strategic investments, Tanzanian capital inflows into Kenya are expected to more than double by the end of this year, further strengthening our economic partnership,” Ruto said.
He noted that cross-border investments were increasingly shaping regional value chains, particularly in manufacturing and agro-processing.
By stimulating demand for raw materials and supporting value addition, the investments were helping build integrated supply chains capable of serving both domestic and export markets.
The Kenyan leader said the trajectory presented an opportunity for the two countries to expand their influence in the East African Community (EAC) and tap into the wider market offered by the African Continental Free Trade Area.
“Intra-regional trade within the EAC remains low, at between 10% and 15% of total trade, which means that the majority of our commerce still takes place outside the region. This gap represents a major opportunity for expansion.”
Ruto said that strengthening intra-regional trade would boost economic growth and enhance resilience against global economic shocks, including supply chain disruptions and fluctuating commodity prices.
He also underscored the importance of policy coordination and regulatory alignment in unlocking further growth. Ruto called for the removal of non-tariff barriers, harmonisation of standards and faster implementation of trade facilitation measures to support businesses operating across borders.
Beyond economics, he highlighted the historical and cultural ties that bound Kenya and Tanzania, noting that the relationship had evolved from a shared struggle for independence into a strategic partnership anchored in regional integration.
He referenced the formation of the original EAC in 1967 and its eventual collapse in 1977, cautioning that failure to sustain a shared vision and prioritise collective interests had undermined progress at the time.
“That experience reminds us that integration requires more than agreements — it requires trust, consistency and a commitment to shared prosperity.”
Ruto said the biggest barrier to deeper integration was neither infrastructure nor policy but mistrust between partner states. That continued to slow decision-making and limit economic cooperation.
“Our greatest challenge is not each other. It is poverty, unemployment and underdevelopment. These are the issues we must confront together,” he said.
The two countries share a 800km border stretching from the Indian Ocean to Lake Victoria, forming a vital corridor for trade, tourism and transport. The corridor connects key economic zones and supports the movement of goods and people across the region.
Kiswahili, spoken by more than 100 million people across East Africa, remains a critical unifying factor, facilitating communication, commerce and cultural exchange.
Ruto urged leaders in both countries to accelerate integration efforts and move beyond incremental reforms toward decisive action.
“The time has come for our generation to act boldly. By working together, we can unlock greater opportunities, build stronger economies and secure shared prosperity for our people,” he said.
Constitutional Court expected to make landmark Phala Phala ruling on Friday:
The Constitutional Court is set to deliver judgment on Friday in a landmark constitutional challenge over whether parliament acted lawfully when it rejected a Section 89 panel report recommending an impeachment inquiry against President Cyril Ramaphosa over the controversial Phala Phala matter.
At the centre of the dispute is a report chaired by retired chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, which found that there was sufficient evidence to justify parliament considering whether to establish an impeachment inquiry.
The panel’s findings relate to allegations concerning the alleged theft and handling of foreign currency at Ramaphosa’s Limpopo Phala Phala game farm.
The panel examined allegations that about $ 580 000 in foreign currency was concealed in a sofa on the farm and later stolen, as well as questions on whether proper procedures were followed.
The report did not make findings of guilt but concluded that the evidence was sufficient to warrant further scrutiny through an impeachment inquiry under Section 89 of the Constitution.
However, the National Assembly voted by 214 to 148 to reject the report, effectively preventing the impeachment process from proceeding to an inquiry stage.
The legal challenge has been brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM). They argue that parliament acted irrationally and unconstitutionally in rejecting the panel’s findings.
They contend that Section 89 establishes an accountability mechanism requiring parliament to properly consider and act on the findings of an independent panel. They argue that the National Assembly cannot legally block the process without constitutionally valid reasons.
The EFF and ATM say parliament’s decision undermines the purpose of the impeachment framework by allowing political majorities to prevent accountability mechanisms from being triggered.
A key aspect of the case is Rule 129 of the National Assembly’s impeachment procedures, which was applied for the first time after being adopted in 2018. The rule provides that the National Assembly retains discretion to decide whether to proceed with impeachment after receiving a Section 89 panel report.
The EFF argues that the discretion is unconstitutional as it allows parliament to override the findings of an independent panel and frustrate the constitutional purpose of the impeachment process.
The party has asked the court to declare the rule invalid and set aside parliament’s decision, arguing that the National Assembly should have proceeded to an impeachment inquiry.
During hearings, the Constitutional Court examined the legal threshold applied by the panel and parliament’s response to its findings. Questions were raised about whether the panel correctly interpreted its mandate and whether parliament properly exercised its discretion when voting to reject the report.
Justice Owen Rogers interrogated aspects of the president’s explanation, including the handling of the cash and its alleged origin from cattle sales. However, the court’s focus remained on the legality of parliament’s decision-making process rather than the factual merits of the allegations.
Parliament, represented by the National Assembly, maintains that it acted within its constitutional powers. It argues that the legislature retains discretion over how to respond to Section 89 panel reports and that courts should not interfere in internal parliamentary processes governed by political decision-making.
It says that accepting the applicants’ position would improperly shift political accountability from elected representatives to the judiciary, undermining the principle of separation of powers.
The ruling is expected to clarify the legal weight of Section 89 panel findings and the extent of parliament’s discretion in impeachment proceedings under the Constitution.
In a statement on Tuesday, the EFF said it waited for the judgment “with the expectation that the Constitutional Court ensures that the Section 89 report is properly returned to Parliament for lawful consideration and accountability processes”.
Western Cape government rejects job-killing draft broad-based black economic empowerment regulations:
South Africa’s commitment to redressing the injustices of the past is both necessary and non-negotiable. Transformation is a constitutional imperative and the Western Cape Government (WCG) has consistently supported policies that promote meaningful economic inclusion, dignity-enhancing work and expanded opportunity for those historically excluded from the economy. It is precisely because transformation matters that the WCG cannot support the Draft Statement 000 on General Principles and the Generic Scorecard of the broad-based Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) regulations.
Let me be clear: this opposition is not ideological resistance to empowerment. It is grounded in economic evidence, constitutional principles and the lived realities of businesses across the country—particularly small, township and rural enterprises. As currently drafted, the regulations risk undermining growth, shrinking market access and introducing significant legal uncertainty. These consequences would hit emerging enterprises the hardest; where job creation potential is greatest and would ultimately weaken rather than advance transformation.
A flawed proxy for empowerment
At the heart of the draft regulations lies a familiar policy choice: continued reliance on race-based compliance as the dominant proxy for empowerment. While race remains an important historical marker in South Africa, empowerment ultimately succeeds or fails on outcomes—poverty reduction, employment creation and skills development.
For township and rural entrepreneurs, empowerment is not abstract. It is measured in access to markets, regulatory clarity, affordable compliance and the ability to grow. When regulations raise barriers to entry, deter investment or increase compliance costs, it entrenches exclusion.
International experience and South Africa’s own economic history demonstrate that sustained economic growth is the most powerful driver of inclusion. Yet Draft Statement 000 does not adequately balance redress with growth nor does it seriously interrogate whether existing broad-based BEE mechanisms have delivered the intended economic outcomes over more than two decades.
Policy contradictions and the Transformation Fund
One of the most serious technical flaws in the Draft Statement is its internal inconsistency, particularly with respect to the proposed Transformation Fund. In Draft Statement 400, the Fund is presented as an alternative to existing Enterprise and Supplier Development contributions. In Draft Statement 000, however, it appears to operate as a mandatory subminimum requirement.
This ambiguity is not a minor drafting issue. For businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises with limited legal or compliance capacity, it creates substantial risk. A single misinterpretation could lead to the loss of points, the discounting of broad-based BEE status or exclusion from supply chains altogether. Regulatory uncertainty of this kind discourages investment and disproportionately harms new entrants to the economy.
Constitutional and procurement risks
Even more concerning are the constitutional implications of paragraph 7.6 of the Draft Statement, which effectively imposes mandatory broad-based BEE documentation requirements as a precondition for tendering. In doing so, it intrudes into the domain of public procurement in a manner that exceeds the minister’s regulatory authority.
Section 217 of the Constitution requires procurement systems to be fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective. While organs of state may choose to apply preferential procurement policies, such choices must originate with the procuring authority itself and cannot be imposed through subordinate regulation. Turning broad-based BEE scorecards into automatic gatekeeping tools risks excluding capable small businesses before they have an opportunity to demonstrate value for money or technical competence.
For township and rural enterprises entering public procurement for the first time, proportional and flexible requirements are essential. Centrally imposed, rigid conditions risk closing doors rather than opening them.
Shrinking markets and rising costs
The cumulative effect of the Draft Statement is to extend broad-based BEE measurement deep into private supply chains. Businesses that do not contract directly with the state may still be forced into compliance simply because they supply someone who does. While this may appear to advance transformation on paper, in practice it risks narrowing supplier pools and excluding emerging firms that lack verification capacity.
For provincial departments responsible for delivering healthcare, education and infrastructure, this translates into higher administrative burdens, delayed procurement and increased costs as compliance expenses are passed on to the state. These outcomes undermine service delivery and directly conflict with the constitutional requirement of cost-effective public spending.
Poor drafting, weak governance
Sound regulation depends on clarity, predictability and coherence. Draft Statement 000 falls short on all three. The text contains inconsistent terminology, incorrect cross-references, missing paragraphs and incomplete tables, with no transitional provisions to guide existing contracts or verification cycles. This exposes both government and business to avoidable legal and commercial uncertainty and undermines meaningful public participation.
A choice about South Africa’s future
The Western Cape Government’s rejection of the draft regulations should not be mistaken for a rejection of transformation. On the contrary, it reflects a commitment to transformation that works—transformation that enables growth and creates jobs.
South Africa faces a clear choice. We can pursue empowerment policies that manage scarcity, raise barriers and deepen legal uncertainty. Or we can pursue empowerment that unlocks growth, supports entrepreneurs, respects constitutional limits and delivers real, measurable improvements in people’s lives.
Transformation and growth are not opposing goals. But poorly designed regulation risks achieving neither. Until Draft Statement 000 is fundamentally revised, we cannot and will not support it.
Dr Ivan Meyer is the Western Cape MEC for Agriculture, Economic Development and Tourism
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
