The Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Procurement Disputes: The Case of Tanzania and Kenya

Public procurement is a cornerstone of government operations, involving substantial financial commitments and the delivery of essential services. Due to its complexity, procurement frequently gives rise to disputes, ranging from bidding irregularities to breaches of contract. Traditionally, such disputes have been addressed through administrative review and litigation. However, these methods are often costly, time-consuming, and adversarial. This article explores the growing relevance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in managing procurement-related disputes, with a comparative legal focus on Tanzania and Kenya. Drawing on doctrinal, empirical, and comparative methodologies, the article critically examines the legal and institutional frameworks that support procurement dispute resolution in both countries. In Tanzania, the Public Procurement Act, 2023 and the Arbitration Act provide internal and contractual mechanisms for dispute settlement, while administrative review is carried out by the Public Procurement Appeals Authority (PPAA). In Kenya, the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 and the Arbitration Act, 1995 form the legal backbone, complemented by the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) and a strong constitutional mandate to promote ADR. The study finds that while both jurisdictions have made strides in creating formal review bodies, Kenya exhibits more advanced digital integration, greater constitutional support for ADR, and widespread adoption of arbitration clauses in procurement contracts. Tanzania’s reforms under the 2023 Act mark a shift toward improved internal resolution mechanisms, though challenges in ADR implementation persist due to lack of statutory clarity and limited awareness. The article concludes with practical recommendations, including legislative reforms, institutional capacity-building, integration of ADR clauses in standard contracts, public awareness campaigns, and the promotion of mediation and early settlement options. These efforts would not only enhance dispute resolution efficiency but also strengthen trust and accountability in public procurement systems.