President William Ruto has declined to sign the
Conflict of Interest Bill, 2025, citing the need to strengthen Kenya's anti-corruption
framework.
Instead, he has returned it to Parliament with a list
of substantial amendments tightening ethical standards for public officials.
His memorandum to the National
Assembly and Senate identifies critical weaknesses in the legislation passed
earlier this year.
In his note, Ruto is
demanding tougher ethical safeguards for public officials.
At the heart of the President's concerns is that MPs
allowed public officers to circumvent the law's intentions through technical
loopholes.
One of the most notable deficiencies addressed in the
memorandum is the absence of precise definitions for key terms.
The President has insisted on defining
"family," "relative," and "undeclared asset" better
to eliminate ambiguities that public officers might exploit.
He wants "family" to include spouses,
dependent children, parents, and even parents of a spouse, while
"relative" is to cover anyone related by birth, marriage or adoption.
The administration of the proposed law also came under
scrutiny amid concerns there would be accountability gaps in the manner in
which MPs passed the bill.
“Public officers may conceal assets acquired through
conflict of interest by failing to declare or explain such assets,” the
memorandum reads.
The bill had assigned implementation responsibilities
to both the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and unspecified
"reporting authorities," setting the stage for overlaps in roles.
President Ruto has recommended the EACC be given
exclusive authority, given that its mandate is to enforce ethical standards among
public officers.
Among the most significant proposed changes involves
strengthening the EACC's enforcement capabilities.
The President has directed that the commission be
explicitly empowered to initiate forfeiture proceedings against unexplained or
undeclared assets.
“It is imperative to empower the commission to
institute forfeiture proceedings against public officers, who fail to declare or
explain assets,” Ruto said.
He argued the proposed law, as approved, would
have posed a major loophole in the assets recovery bid.
The memorandum also aims to remove provisions that could
have weakened the law's effectiveness.
Notably, the President has called for the removal of a
"good faith" exception.
It is viewed that it would have allowed public officers to
avoid penalties for granting preferential treatment if they claimed honest
intentions.
“The exception gives room for a public officer to
justify unlawful conduct through subjective claims.”
Gift regulations is another area receiving heightened
scrutiny in the President’s veto.
The amendments would require public officers to
declare not only gifts they receive personally, but also those accepted by
family members or relatives.
The expansion is designed to prevent the circumvention
of anti-bribery measures through third parties.
Additionally, reporting entities would need to
maintain comprehensive gift registers covering all recipients, not just public
officers.
“To prevent abuse of gifting by reporting entities,
there is a need to provide for an accountability framework that covers gifts
given to all persons,” Ruto said.
The President's recommendations also seek to broaden
restrictions on government contracting.
While the original bill barred public officers from
holding interests in entities doing business with their agencies, the
amended version would extend this prohibition to any entity contracting with
the government, significantly reducing opportunities for insider dealings.
In a move that may prove controversial among
legislators, the President has removed an exemption that would have allowed
members of Parliament and county assemblies to participate in debates where
they had conflicts of interest.
This change subjects lawmakers to the same recusal
requirements as other public officials.
To ensure greater transparency in asset declarations,
the memorandum introduces a detailed definition of "material change"
that officials must report.
This includes significant fluctuations in asset
values, acquisitions or disposals of property, and changes in marital status or
organisational memberships.
The President's intervention comes at a time when his
administration has been emphasising anti-corruption measures, including
lifestyle audits for public officials and increased funding for anti-graft
agencies.
MPs triggered uproar with their initial bid to give
elected leaders, parastatal chiefs, and other state officers the leeway to bag
state tenders.
This was before a House team seized the matter and
strengthened the proposed law to make it bite public servants caught up in
graft probes.
Senators had expunged key proposals that Ruto had
proposed to the chagrin of the EACC and the President.
Among the radical proposals senators put forth was to
excuse persons accused and charged with graft from stepping down.
A mediation committee rolled back the Senate
amendments, which also included allowing public officers to engage in other
jobs while serving in a public body.
In his last State of the Nation address, Ruto lashed out at the
lawmakers and anti-graft agencies for their lethargy in the graft fight.
While the changes have been hailed as welcome, the true
test will lie in consistent enforcement once the law is enacted.
Lawmakers can either adopt the changes or attempt to
override the President's objections, but they have to raise a two-thirds
majority vote.
Given the past challenges with raising the two-thirds,
Ruto’s memorandum is likely to sail through with ease.
