Fruits of impunity: How respect for rule of law fuels growth

Kenya’s development debate has tolerated a dangerous illusion: that corruption can coexist with prosperity provided the government launches enough projects. The World Bank’s latest assessment challenges that comfort.

Corruption damages more than public morality. It destroys economic possibilities, making citizens poorer than they need to be and denying enterprises conditions to grow.

Under an ambitious reform scenario, Kenya’s economy could be 22.3 per cent larger by 2035 than without those reforms, with up to 7.7 million additional and better jobs.

These are projections, not promises. But they reveal what Kenya stands to gain by addressing the governance failures that discourage investment, weaken productivity and restrict employment.

Behind those figures are graduates seeking work, businesses unable to expand and families without secure incomes. Corruption steals more than money. It takes away opportunities that money could have created. Many of its victims never encounter a corrupt official.

This gives weight to Edwin Sifuna’s argument that respect for the law belongs in economic policy. When political connections determine contracts and wrongdoing attracts protection, honest enterprise loses. Influence replaces innovation, efficiency and productive effort as the route to reward.

Electricity demonstrates the consequences. The World Bank identifies nontransparent power contracts and weaknesses in procurement among the governance problems contributing to high costs. This does not make every private generator corrupt. It means opaque agreements and inadequate competition may leave consumers paying charges they cannot properly examine.

The damage spreads beyond household electricity bills. A welding workshop delays hiring. A manufacturer raises prices. A shopkeeper spends more on refrigeration. A hospital diverts money towards keeping equipment running. These costs enter the price of goods and services, reducing household purchasing power and competitiveness of Kenyan businesses.

Any administration promising industrialisation must therefore explain how it will provide affordable and reliable electricity. Speeches cannot compensate for costly contracts. Investors need predictable tariffs, dependable supply and confidence that procurement serves the public rather than political connections.

Sifuna has proposed a legislative response. His Energy (Amendment) Bill, Senate Bills No. 42 of 2023, seeks greater transparency in electricity purchasing, including disclosure of the beneficial owners of generating companies. The Senate passed it on 15 April 2025. That proposal addresses a problem too often reduced to campaign rhetoric.

Criticism must, however, respect parliamentary facts. The National Assembly began its Second Reading on February 19, 2026. On February 24, the House approved that reading and committed the Bill to the Committee of the whole House. It would be wrong to describe it as still awaiting Second Reading.

The proper demand is for Speaker Moses Wetang’ula and parliamentary leaders to explain subsequent progress, remaining stages and when consideration will conclude. Citizens should know whether provisions making transparency enforceable will survive.

During debate, the Energy Committee proposed deleting clauses it considered duplicative or inconsistent with existing frameworks. Those concerns deserve scrutiny rather than automatic rejection.

If existing law already provides adequate safeguards, why do transparency problems persist? Parliament should explain how the revised wording will close practical gaps. Tidier legislation must not mean weaker accountability.

Beneficial ownership disclosure matters because a company’s registered name does not always reveal who ultimately profits from public contracts. Accessible information helps journalists, regulators and citizens identify possible conflicts of interest.

 It also protects legitimate investors against suspicion arising from undisclosed commercial relationships. Disclosure alone will not lower tariffs. Regulators must also test contract prices, capacity charges and procurement decisions against demonstrable public value.

Otherwise transparency risks becoming an archive of expensive arrangements that nobody has the authority or courage to correct. Scrutiny must extend to regulators and purchasing entities, not merely power generators or contractors.

The government formed after 2027 should make constitutionalism a working discipline. Public contracts must withstand scrutiny, procurement should be competitive and oversight bodies must investigate without interference. Court orders should be obeyed. Evidence must guide prosecutions, while due process protects everyone, including those accused of stealing public money.

These obligations must apply to the incoming administration itself. Anti-corruption promises lose meaning if they target only former opponents. Ministers, relatives, financiers and allies must face the same standards as everyone else. Changing government should change the rules governing power, not merely the people benefiting from secrecy.

Citizens need practical rights, including access to contracts, understandable electricity bills, reliable complaints procedures and real consequences for abuse. Reform has succeeded when ordinary people can question decisions, obtain evidence and receive answers without intimidation.

Kenya should judge development through functioning services, affordable production and expanding opportunity. Announcing spending proves only that money was allocated. It does not establish public value.

The World Bank’s assessment poses an uncomfortable question about how much prosperity is sacrificed to preserve impunity. Sifuna’s Bill offers one way to make that question actionable. Public money must serve public need.