Shadowy Firms Earn KSh 1.45 Billion from Kenya’s eCitizen – MPs Demand Transparency

Lack of Transparency in eCitizen Management Raises Concerns

A recent investigative report published by Business Daily has uncovered that shadowy private firms managing Kenya’s eCitizen platform have earned a staggering KSh 1.45 billion between June 2024 and early 2025. Despite handling millions of transactions and collecting significant revenues, the ownership and operational details of these companies remain undisclosed, raising concerns over transparency, accountability, and potential corruption in government contracts.

Private Firms Profit from eCitizen Transactions

According to the Auditor-General’s findings, these firms processed over 11 million transactions, collecting KSh 1.99 billion from a total of KSh 5.85 billion in payments made by citizens for government services. Shockingly, nearly a third of the revenue generated was retained by these private entities, while the rest was remitted to the government. This has prompted intense scrutiny from Members of Parliament (MPs), who are now demanding full disclosure of the contractual agreements and ownership details behind these firms.

Cybersecurity Risks and Data Breach Fears

In addition to financial concerns, the report highlights alarming cybersecurity risks associated with the eCitizen system. The Auditor-General flagged vulnerabilities that could expose sensitive user data to cyberattacks. Given the critical role eCitizen plays in offering government services, these risks pose a significant threat to national digital security. Experts warn that without proper oversight, the integrity of personal and financial data stored on the platform could be compromised.

MPs Call for Investigation and Contract Review

The revelations have ignited a debate among lawmakers and governance watchdogs, who argue that an essential public service like eCitizen should not be controlled by undisclosed private entities. Many are calling for an urgent review of government contracts to ensure that public funds are not being unfairly siphoned by unknown firms. Additionally, questions remain about whether these companies were awarded contracts through a competitive and transparent process or if deeper issues of corruption and favoritism are at play.

(Copied from Business Daily, Weekend Edition, February 28 - March 2, 2025, Page 1)