I think we are missing some key legal and factual points here which affect the public tendering rules and why Kimunya did not follow them.
One - The Grand Regency Hotel (GRH) was
not public property. It was Pattn's property. Here is the explanation.
Pattni owned Exchange bank. Exchange Bank owed CBK KShs 2.5 billion and did not pay up. As in any normal transaction, CBK secured a charge over the GRH which the Pattni/Exchange Bank owned. That's why there was a CBK receiver at the GRH. If GRH was built using public money, CBK could not have placed a charge over it - ie how can u charge a property u already own?
Two - the valuation of GRH does
NOT matter in this case. All CBK could recover from the sale of GRH was the amount of the charge over the hotel which in this case is KShs 2.5 billion.
Even if CBK had sold it for KShs 100 billion, all CBK would get was KShs 2.5 billion. The difference would have gone to Pattni. Otherwise, CBK would be benefitting from the misfortune of Pattni's bankruptcy. That is the law
This is why we hear of people complaining about mortgages when they default. A guy has a house worth KShs 5 million but he owes a mortgage institution (HFCK for eg) KShs 1 million which he has defaulted in paying. The mortgage institution (bank) has a charge over the house. To recover its money, it sells the house for KShs 1.1 million yet the property is worth 5 times that amount. The owner (Borrower) is left asking WHY

?
Cos the bank is onley owed KShs 1 million. It does not care about how much the property is worth. If it sells the house for Kshs 5 million, it has to refund the KShs 4 m diff to the owner. To get this 5 m, the bank has to wait for time before it can get a buyer willing to pay that value. And of cos the bank cant just wait to get this buyer just to recover KShs 1 million - so it goes for the quickest buyer at KShs 1m fire sale.
If the law allowed the bank to sell the KShs 5m charged property for Kshs 5m and then keep all the KShs 5m, all banks would do is to wait for borrowers to repay 90% of the loan then unilaterally declare the borrower bankrupt. Then they profit - in this case, the bank would make a profit of KShs 4m (Kshs 5 million which is the value less the amount owed of KShs 1 million) and profit from the foreclosure.
Three - There is the accusation that Kimunya did not follow the pubic procurement and disposal rules. That is true. On that he is guilty of not following the letter of the law.
But lets look at the spirit of the law. The law requires that the Privatisation Committee do a tender of the property (GRH) so that it can get the best price.
In this case, even if the Privatisation Committee had recommended and executed an auction or even did an IPO of the Grand Regency, how much money would CBK have recovered from the sale? Exactly KShs 2.5 billion. No more. In fact, had the auction/IPO got proceeds of less than KShs 2.5 billion, CBK would have lost money on the deal.
So in fact, had the GRH been auctioned to the highest bidder or sold via an IPO and got lets say KShs 7.5 billion, the govt would have only recovered Kshs 2.5 billion and given the diff to Pattni. So why go through all these procedures just to benefit Pattni or run the risk of selling the hotel for less than the charged amount? Especially when u have a ready buyer who is ready and willing to immediately pay the required KShs 2.5 billion?
So Kimunya simply followed common sense. The only problem is that he seems not to have informed his cabinet colleagues - but as time passes, we now hear he has challenged Raila, Wako and Ringera to deny - something they have yet to do.
If I was Kimunya, I would sit tight and let the facts come out - otherwise right now MPs are just doing mob justice! not forgetting they dont want to pay taxes!