Nairobi, Kenya – Recent high-profile security meetings, including the 'Jukwaa la Usalama' forums spearheaded by Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen, have drawn criticism over their effectiveness and the significant taxpayer funds allocated to them. While the government asserts these gatherings are crucial for national security, analysts and sections of the public question whether they translate into concrete improvements on the ground.

The debate intensifies as Kenya continues to grapple with various security challenges, ranging from militant attacks to internal dissent and rising crime rates. The government's approach to national security has historically been described as largely state-centric and reactive, often overlooking non-state-centric threats.

Historical and Political Context

Kenya's national security framework, established under Article 239 of the 2010 Constitution, comprises the Kenya Defence Forces (KDF), the National Police Service (NPS), and the National Intelligence Service (NIS). The country has faced numerous security threats since independence, with approximately 350 terror attacks recorded between March 1975 and January 2019, resulting in over 1,411 fatalities. In response, successive governments have consistently increased allocations to the security sector. For instance, the 2024-2025 budget saw an allocation of KSh 377.5 billion for security, a KSh 39.3 billion increase from the previous year.

Despite increased funding, public confidence in the state of security and in the police as a national security organ has diminished, according to various monitoring and surveys. Allegations of human rights violations, corruption, and extortion against security forces have further eroded public trust, potentially undermining sustainable solutions to violent extremism.

Laws, Policy and Governance

Kenya's security policy is guided by the Kenya Vision 2030, which outlines reforms such as establishing an Independent Police Complaints Authority, a framework for coordinating public and private security stakeholders, and implementing an Integrated Population Registration System. Key policy reforms include the finalisation and rollout of a National Security Policy, Community Policing Policy, and a Stakeholders Partnership Policy. However, the implementation of these policies and the enforcement of laws like the Data Protection Act of 2019 have faced challenges, leading to concerns about oversight and transparency in security operations.

Stakeholders and Testimonies

Public participation in security agenda setting is recognised as crucial. A study in Nairobi City County indicated that Assistant County Commissioners and Officers Commanding Police Stations (OCS) primarily engage citizens through public meetings (75% of respondents), with only 25% using social media. These meetings are intended to enhance trust, cooperation, and communication between communities and government policing agencies. However, the effectiveness of such forums is often questioned, particularly when they are perceived as lavish and failing to address pertinent security matters.

Evidence and Data

Risks and Implications

The heavy spending on security, coupled with concerns about the efficacy of public engagement forums, carries several risks. If security meetings are perceived as ineffective or wasteful, they can further erode public trust and confidence in government institutions. This mistrust can hinder intelligence gathering and community cooperation, which are vital for effective crime prevention and counter-terrorism efforts. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in the expenditure of security funds, particularly for agencies like the NIS whose budget is often presented as a single-line item, raises accountability concerns.

Unknowns and Controversies

A key uncertainty revolves around the specific metrics used to evaluate the success of security meetings and the direct impact of increased funding on crime reduction and public safety. While a study in Machakos County suggested that security meetings can enhance trust and cooperation, leading to effective crime prevention, the broader national impact remains debated. Additionally, the audit exposing the Kenyatta International Convention Centre (KICC) for spending KSh 30.9 million on hotel board meetings, contrary to regulations, highlights potential misuse of public funds in government gatherings, raising questions about similar practices in security forums.

Timeline and Next Steps

The government continues to implement various security initiatives, including the National Surveillance, Communication, and Control System (NSCCS) in Nairobi and Mombasa, a KSh 14.9 billion project aimed at enhancing urban security through CCTV cameras and data analysis. The National Treasury's increased allocation to the security sector for the 2024-2025 financial year indicates a continued focus on bolstering security infrastructure and operations.

What to Watch

Moving forward, observers will be keenly watching for greater transparency in the allocation and expenditure of security funds. The public and analysts will also be looking for demonstrable evidence of how security meetings and increased investments translate into a measurable reduction in crime and enhanced public safety. Calls for more detailed budget breakdowns from agencies like the NIS, even in closed-door sessions, are likely to persist to ensure accountability.