Public officials may soon be barred from receiving high-value gifts as the government moves to impose a strict Sh20,000 annual limit from any single source, in a fresh bid to seal corruption loopholes and restore public trust in state institutions.
The proposed changes are contained in the draft Conflict of Interest Regulations, 2026, spearheaded by Attorney General Dorcas Oduor and currently under examination by the National Assembly’s Committee on Delegated Legislation.
The framework outlines new rules to guide how public officers handle gifts, personal interests, and outside engagements that may compromise their duties.
Under the proposals, any gift exceeding the Sh20,000 threshold or received more than once a year from the same source must be handed over to the government. The rules also seek to standardise how benefits are recorded and managed across ministries, departments, and agencies.
The Attorney General said the regulations are meant to promote accountability and eliminate undue influence in decision-making.
“These regulations provide clarity and uniformity in conflict-of-interest management and enhance transparency in public administration,” Oduor said on Thursday.
Developed in consultation with the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, the draft introduces stricter reporting obligations and enforcement measures aimed at addressing long-standing gaps in ethical compliance within the public sector.
A key requirement is the mandatory declaration of any personal or financial interest that could affect an officer’s work.
“Regulation six deals with disclosure of conflict of interest, and in summary, a public officer must declare any personal or private interest that could influence their official work by filing and submitting the required Form A provided in the Schedule,” Oduor told the National Assembly Delegated Legislation Committee.
“And further to that, it is not just private interest, but private interest that could affect the public officer’s decision-making or activity.”
The draft further compels officers to maintain records of all benefits received, obtain approval before engaging in secondary employment, and recuse themselves from processes where a conflict arises.
Judith Pareno, Principal Secretary in the State Department for Justice, Human Rights and Constitutional Affairs, said disclosures must be made at different stages of official engagements to ensure transparency.
“When disclosures can be made they include prior to a meeting, proceeding or discussion, after a meeting, proceeding or discussion, and before the limits of the transaction in question are confirmed,” noted Pareno.
Non-compliance with the proposed rules could attract penalties ranging from disciplinary measures to fines or imprisonment as outlined in the parent law.
However, the proposals have drawn scrutiny from lawmakers, who warned that certain provisions may be open to misuse if not clearly defined. Questions were raised over how to interpret “complimentary treatment,” including hospitality extended during official duties, and how to separate genuine corporate social responsibility initiatives from benefits aimed at individuals.
“There is room for interpretation that could be exploited or inconsistently applied,” Kiambu MP John Machua said, urging that the language be tightened.
Government officials defended the approach, noting that some flexibility is necessary to cater for different working environments.
“For example, hospitality offered during official duties or in high-risk environments may be legitimate, but must be transparent and appropriate to the officer’s role,” the Attorney General explained.
During the session led by Committee chairperson Samuel Chepkonga, members also questioned provisions on delegation of powers and acceptance of benefits by officers and their relatives. Kilgoris MP Julius Sunkuli warned that such clauses could create room for abuse if not properly framed.
“We must be careful that such provisions do not open backdoors for abuse,” he said, while also criticising the use of outdated and gendered language in parts of the draft. “The language that is used is still the sexist language of the 20th century… the same appears in Regulation 12, which I want to dwell on.”
Oduor acknowledged the concerns and pledged to revise the language.
“We intended to use gender-neutral language and, unfortunately, this was not consistent. That is valid and something we will work on,” she said.
Vice-chairperson Robert Gichimu called for the inclusion of a general penalty clause to cover violations not expressly addressed.
“If I don’t abide by these regulations and there’s no specific penalty, then there might be room for someone to escape,” he said.
He proposed penalties of up to Sh1 million or six months in jail for such cases, in addition to existing sanctions under the main law, which include fines of up to Sh5 million or five years’ imprisonment for individuals and up to Sh10 million for organisations.
On corporate social responsibility, the Attorney General clarified that such initiatives should not directly benefit individuals.
“Conflict of interest is where your public duty conflicts with your personal interest. CSR is not to an individual unless it directly benefits you.”
The regulations are intended to operationalise the Conflict of Interest Act, 2025, and form part of broader efforts to strengthen ethical conduct in public service.
The committee resolved that the concerns raised, including gaps in enforcement and wording, will be addressed through amendments as Parliament moves to finalise the regulations.