The deadly Eastleigh building collapse has triggered a fierce confrontation between Embakasi East MP Babu Owino and Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja, with accusations of irregular approvals, a disputed document and threats of court action intensifying the controversy.

The dispute comes as rescue teams continue searching for people reported missing following the collapse of a multi-storey building along 9th Street in Eastleigh, Nairobi, on Friday, October 23, 2026.

According to the Associated Press, four people had been rescued alive by Sunday, while the Kenya Red Cross reported 47 people missing. The disaster has renewed questions about construction safety, development approvals and the enforcement of building regulations in Nairobi. 

Babu Owino has accused Sakaja of misleading Kenyans about the building's approval status, while the governor insists that the document circulating online does not prove that the county authorised construction.

On Sunday, October 25, Babu shared a document on social media that he said showed Nairobi County had approved the development on February 13, 2024.

The MP argued that the document contradicted Sakaja's position that the building lacked the necessary construction approval. He also alleged that KSh120 million had been paid as a bribe to secure approval, although the allegation has not been independently established.

According to reporting by The Star, Sakaja disputed the document's authenticity and argued that the development application was submitted in November 2024, months after the date appearing on the document.

The governor maintained that the county had approved a change of use for the property in October 2024, allowing residential and commercial use, but had not granted development approval for the proposed high-rise building. 

Sakaja further alleged that the developer proceeded with construction despite enforcement action by county officials.

The disagreement has placed the approval process under renewed scrutiny, with questions emerging over how the building reached multiple storeys if the necessary construction permissions had not been granted.

The legal confrontation escalated on Sunday when Sakaja, through his lawyers, issued Babu a demand letter requiring him to remove the disputed social media posts within six hours or face possible defamation proceedings.

According to Kenyans.co.ke, the letter challenged posts published on X and Facebook that linked the governor to the disputed development approval. Sakaja's lawyers argued that the claims were misleading and damaging to his reputation. 

However, Babu has refused to back down.

Speaking during a KCSE revision class on Monday, October 26, the Embakasi East MP challenged the governor to take the matter to court.

"Let's meet in court, SAKAJA. I will not apologise to a man who has destroyed lives of Nairobians. He MUST answer for suffering. I will cross-examine you myself," Babu declared, according to Nairobi Leo. 

The MP maintains that the county's approval records raise questions about Sakaja's explanation of the building's status. He has also argued that the National Construction Authority's involvement in registering the project supports his demand for accountability.

Sakaja, however, insists that approval to change a property's use is different from approval to construct a high-rise building. The authenticity and legal significance of the document shared by Babu remain central to the dispute.

Meanwhile, the tragedy has prompted further scrutiny from investigative authorities.

On Monday, Citizen Digital reported that the Director of Public Prosecutions had directed the Directorate of Criminal Investigations to conduct a thorough investigation into the collapse.

The investigation will examine the roles of Nairobi County officials, the developer, contractors and other construction professionals to establish whether any acts or omissions contributed to the disaster. The ODPP also disclosed that Nairobi County had not forwarded an inquiry file concerning possible wrongdoing in the building's construction to its office. 

The Standard also reported that investigators are expected to examine the building's planning, approval, supervision and construction, including whether the project complied with the relevant regulations. 

As the investigation continues, the dispute between Babu and Sakaja has become part of a wider public demand for answers over construction safety and accountability.

The central questions remain unresolved: Was the building granted the necessary construction approval? Were warnings or enforcement measures sufficient to stop the development? And did any public officials or private parties fail in their legal responsibilities?

The answers will depend on the documentary evidence and the findings of the ongoing investigations.

For the families still waiting for news of their missing relatives, however, the immediate concern remains the search for survivors and accountability for the tragedy.