Nairobi, Kenya – The annual conferment of national honours, intended to celebrate exemplary service and patriotism, is currently facing intense scrutiny following the release of a controversial shortlist of nominees. The list, compiled by a parliamentary committee, has sparked widespread public debate and raised questions about the criteria used for selection, particularly concerning individuals reportedly linked to corruption, abuse of office, and criminal offences.

The National Honours Act, 2013, clearly outlines that recipients of these prestigious awards should exhibit exemplary qualities, heroism, sacrifice, bravery, patriotism, or leadership for the defence, benefit, or betterment of the country or a county. However, critics argue that the current shortlist deviates from these principles, with some nominees having pasts tainted by courtroom battles and unresolved allegations.

Historical and Political Context

Concerns over the integrity of State awards are not new in Kenya. For years, there has been public discontent that these honours are increasingly bestowed upon undeserving individuals, often perceived as political cronies or relatives of those in power. This has led to a perception that the awards have become tools for political appeasement rather than genuine recognition of merit and sacrifice. The selection process, advised by the National Honours and Awards Committee, has often been criticised for its lack of transparency.

Laws, Policy, and Governance

The legal framework governing national honours is primarily the National Honours Act, 2013. This Act establishes the procedures and mechanisms for conferring national honours, specifying the President's role and the merits required for recipients. It also provides for various advisory committees, including the National and County Governments Honours Advisory Committee, the Parliamentary Honours Advisory Committee, and the Judiciary Honours Advisory Committee, to guide the President on nominations. While the Act allows for the revocation of awards for misconduct or moral failure, this clause is rarely enforced, further eroding the system's credibility.

Stakeholders and Testimonies

Civil society groups have been vocal in their criticism, arguing that the awards have lost their meaning and are reduced to mere instruments of political patronage. This sentiment was echoed by Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya in June 2025, who announced his intention to return his Moran of the Burning Spear (MBS) and Elder of the Burning Spear (EBS) awards, citing political persecution and the awards losing their meaning in light of corruption charges he faced. He questioned the integrity of a system that honours individuals one day and prosecutes them the next.

Evidence and Data

Risks and Implications

The continued inclusion of individuals with questionable integrity in the national honours list risks devaluing these awards and undermining public trust in institutions. If the honours system is perceived as a reward for political loyalty rather than genuine service, it could discourage true heroism and patriotism among citizens. This could also influence public debate and policy execution, as stakeholders demand greater clarity and safeguards in the nomination process.

Unknowns and Controversies

The specific details of the parliamentary committee's deliberations and the rationale behind the inclusion of certain controversial nominees remain largely unknown to the public. While the National Honours Act allows for revocation, the criteria and process for such actions are rarely invoked, leading to questions about accountability.

Timeline and Next Steps

The 2025 National Honours List is currently awaiting approval in the National Assembly. The awards are typically conferred by the President on national days such as Jamhuri Day (December 12) or Mashujaa Day (October 20). Public pressure is mounting on both Parliament and the Presidency to address the integrity concerns before the final conferment.

What to Watch

All eyes will be on the National Assembly's review of the nominees and any potential amendments to the list. The public will also be watching for statements from the National Honours and Awards Committee or the Presidency addressing the integrity concerns. Any changes to the nomination process or a more rigorous enforcement of the revocation clause in the National Honours Act would signal a commitment to restoring the credibility of these important national awards.