As preparations for the 2027 general elections gather momentum, scrutiny is intensifying around one of the most opaque aspects of the electoral process: campaign financing. If left unchecked political spending could ones again fuel corruption, entrench inequality and enable the rise of organized political violence, including hiring of goons, a scaring trend already evidenced in the ongoing campaigns.
Despite existing legal frameworks governing donations and expenditure, enforcement remains exremely weak. As highlighted by IEBC Chairperson Erastus Edung Ethekon during a National Assembly leadership retreat, the failure to enforce a comprehensive Election Campaign Financing Law remains a major vulnerability that could compromise the credibility and fairness of the 2027 General Election. He stated:
“The absence of clear, enforceable rules on who can fund campaigns, how much they can contribute and from where those funds originate weakens our democratic processes and opens the door to undue influence,”
The key law governing campaign financing is the Election Campaign Financing Act,2013 which provides for the regulation, management, expenditure and accountability of election campaign funds during election and referendum campaigns. However, this legislation has never been fully implemented because Parliament has delayed adopting the implementing regulations, effectively downplaying the efforts to limit campaign expenditures and moniture contributions.
Opaque financing not only distorts fair competition but also creates incentives for corruption. Political candidates who rely on large, untraceable donations may feel compelled to repay their donors through government tenders, policy favors,or preferential access to state resources once elected. The result is a self-perpetuating cycle in which political power is used to recoup campaign investments, further eroding public trust in governance.
Yet, beyond corruption lies a more dangerous and often overlooked consequence; the financing of political violence. Beneath the surface of legitimate political mobilization is a delibarate and well-funded architecture of disorder. Persons engaged in acts of intimidation and violence do not emerge spontaneuosly, they are recruited, transported, coordinated and paid. These activities are financed through the same shadowy channels that sustain opaque campaigns. In this sense, the currency of secrecy does not merely corrupt governance, it purchases violence.
When money flows without scrutiny, it does not stop at billboards, posters and campaign caravans. It seeps into the darker alleys of political strategy, where ethnicity is weaponized, grievances are inflamed, and youth is converted into foot soldiers of crime. The result of this is a toxic convergence of financial opacity and ethnic or youth mobilization, one that has, in past electoral cycles, pushed commuities to the brink.Kenya’s electoral history reminds us of how such dynamics can escalate, with devastating consequences for national cohesion.
As the country moves closer to the 2027 elections, the warning signs are difficult to ignore. The violence witnessed during the November 2025 by-elections and in ongoing political campaigns
butress the urgent need for change. This concern is further reflected in a recently launched Enabling Environment Snapshot Kenya Report by Transparency International Kenya, which notes that “Political realignment and rallies, grassroots mobilisation have become more and more frequent, leading to growing tensions between the security enforcements, leading to political violence, posing threat to the protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms.”
These incidents are not isolated, they are symptoms of a deeper structural problem rooted in opaque campaign financing.
Campaign financing, therefore, becomes not just a governance issue but a security concern as currently being evidenced. It bankrolls networks that transform elections from contests of ideas into arenas of intimidation and identity-based, conflict-patterns that are already beginning to surface in the current political climate.
The Way Forward:
Frist, the Elections Campaign Financing Act 2013 must be fully implemented. This includes the immediate gazettement and enforcement of regulations setting clear spending limits and strict disclosure requirements. The IEBC, as the implementing body, must also be adequately resourced to enforce compliance in real time, including establishing transparent reporting systems and imposing timely sanctions for violations.
Second, the Political parties Act, 2011 should be enforced to require greater financial transparency within political parties. Parties must maintain audited accounts, disclose their donors and ensure that the funding is not diverted to illegal campaign activities, including sponsoring violence such as hiring of goons. Strengthening internal party accountability mechanisms will be critical in curbing misuse of funds at the source.
Third, the enforcement agencies, EACC and ODPP, must actively investigate and prosecute cases where campaign funds are linked to bribery, procurement fraud or the financing of political violence.
Lastly, there is need for enhanced inter-agency coordination and public oversight.The civil society, media and citizens must actively serve as watchdogs by monitoring political spending and exposing irregularities. Transparency mechanisms, including public access to campaign finance data, will be essential in ensuring accountability beyond state institutions.
Without firm enforcement of the above laws, and other related laws, opaque campaign financing will remain a conduit for corruption and a financier of political violence. The legal framework exists, what is required now is implementation, accountability and political will.
