Has Public Participation in Kenya Become a Mere Constitutional Ritual?

By Mercy Kalee

Article 10 and Article 118 of Kenya’s Constitution have anchored public participation as a cornerstone of democratic governance. The intention was very clear, that laws and policies affecting citizens should not be made without them having an opportunity to be heard. Sixteen years later, however, public participation remains a cosmetic exercise devoid of substance.

The biggest paradox is that despite its constitutional importance, Kenya still lacks a comprehensive legal framework clearly defining how public participation should be conducted. There are no universally binding standards on the number of forums required, the notice period, the duration of consultations, accessibility, or how public views should influence decision-making. This legislative vacuum has left public institutions to interpret the constitutional requirement differently, often reducing it to the mere collection of memoranda or hurried public meetings.

Kenyans have consequently found the process very frustrating. Public forums are frequently announced at short notice, held in limited locations, and characterised by heckling, political grandstanding, and inadequate time for citizens to present their views. In many cases, participants are allocated only a few minutes to comment on lengthy, highly technical Bills with far-reaching consequences. Others are simply invited to submit written memoranda in closed-door committee sessions, with little transparency on how those submissions shape the final legislation.

The recurring debates surrounding recent successive Finance Bills illustrate this problem. Every year, Parliament invites public views on complex tax proposals, yet many citizens and professional bodies argue that overwhelming objections rarely translate into amendments. The perception that decisions have already been made before consultations begin undermines public confidence in the process.

The controversy surrounding major infrastructure projects, including proposals affecting Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, has exposed similar concerns. Citizens have repeatedly questioned why public consultations often take place after key negotiations or procurement decisions have already been made, leaving public participation to appear more like an announcement than genuine consultation.

Perhaps the greatest irony emerged during discussions on the Public Participation Bill, 2025, legislation intended to standardise citizen engagement. Stakeholders criticised rushed notices, inaccessible venues, limited civic education, and inadequate accommodation for persons with disabilities. If the law designed to strengthen public participation was itself criticised for falling short of meaningful engagement, it only shows the absence of political goodwill to streamline the process.

Meaningful public participation cannot be evaluated by attendance registers, photographs of town hall meetings, or the number of memoranda received. It should be seen through citizens being given adequate information, sufficient time, accessible forums, and a genuine opportunity to influence public decisions.

Unless Parliament enacts robust laws and regulations to operationalise this constitutional principle, public participation risks remaining a procedural ritual rather than an instrument of democratic accountability. A constitutional right should never be reduced to a ceremonial exercise. It should remain what the Constitution intended: the people’s voice shaping the decisions that govern their lives.

The writer is a research assistant at Free Press Publishers.