Billions of shillings flowing to counties are increasingly at risk as oversight mechanisms weaken and political battles blur the line between scrutiny and rivalry.
Read Also
Allegations of bribery, conflicted oversight by lawmakers, an inactive criminal justice system and under-resourced county assemblies have combined to erode accountability.
Enjoying this article?
Subscribe for unlimited access to premium sports coverage.
View Plans
These loopholes create opportunities for some governors and finance officials to evade scrutiny while taxpayers bear the cost.
“There is an urgent need to restore genuine accountability, which is indispensable for a government that citizens can truly trust,” said Annet Nerima, a programme manager for political accountability at the Kenya Human Rights Commission.
The spotlight on accountability has intensified amid tensions between governors and senators over billions sent to counties.
Governors have accused senators of extortion, intimidation and harassment when summoned to explain county finances, prompting some to boycott Senate hearings entirely.
“Such claims raise questions about whether oversight has become negotiation rather than scrutiny,” Nerima said.
Senators, however, maintain that county leaders are deliberately evading accountability. They warn that continued non-compliance threatens the integrity of public funds.
“Kenyans are not foolish. They have seen the plunder in counties and can tell that governors are attempting to intimidate the Senate to stop asking hard questions,” Senate County Public Accounts Committee chairman Moses Kajwang’ said.
The standoff has exposed persistent challenges in the devolved system, where oversight institutions often struggle. It has also revealed deeper structural weaknesses, with institutions working at cross-purposes and political ambitions complicating accountability.
Several senators and MCAs tasked with oversight are openly eyeing governor seats in 2027 or backing allies, raising questions about impartiality.
Those linked to governor ambitions include Danson Mungatana, Abass Sheikh, Fatuma Dullo, Enoch Wambua, Wahome Wamatinga, Godfrey Osotsi, James Murango, James Lomenen, Kanar Seki, Boni Khalwale, Samson Cherargei and Okong’o Omogeni.
Some of the aspirants — including Dullo, Cherargei, Wambua and Omogeni — sit in CPAC, the very committee that summons governors to answer audit queries.
Governors argue that this dual role fuels politically motivated scrutiny and turns oversight into a campaign platform.
“It is a tragedy that political interests are overriding the accountability mechanism by allowing governors and senators to manipulate oversight,” Nerima said.
Political analyst Martin Andati said these ambitions have strained relations between the two levels of leadership and risk turning accountability into a political weapon.
“Many senators want to be governors. They are using Senate sessions to expose rot in counties and paint governors as corrupt ahead of the elections,” he said.
Oversight has also been weakened by the failure of investigative agencies to act on Senate recommendations.
Over the years, CPAC has produced reports calling for investigations and surcharges against county officials implicated in the misuse of funds, but most cases have stalled.
In 2019, the committee recommended that the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission investigate or surcharge at least 23 current and former governors over alleged misappropriation of public funds.
Little progress has been reported. Many suspects remain in office and some have been acquitted in court.
The inaction has emboldened county executives and weakened deterrence, turning Senate reports into paper tigers.
At the county level, MCAs — the first line of oversight — face capacity and resource constraints that limit their effectiveness.
A report by Mzalendo Trust found that poor facilitation, limited professional support and weak coordination with the Senate have undermined their ability to hold governors accountable.
The report warned that the multi-tiered oversight framework has created gaps that allow impunity to thrive.
Low pay, political patronage and bribery allegations have further compromised some MCAs.
“Oversighting governors is the responsibility of MCAs, not the Senate,” Raila Odinga said last year, arguing that senators were duplicating roles and turning hearings into political theatre.
County assemblies also struggle to enforce summonses, with governors and County Executive Committee members often ignoring invitations or delaying appearances without consequences.
“While the Parliament has strong powers to oversee the Executive, this oversight is often undermined at the county level due to limited resources and insufficient legal backing,” the report stated.
Weak legal backing and limited resources have reduced assemblies to reactive bodies that act only after funds have been lost.
“MCAs’ failures have reduced the Senate’s oversight to a reactive process, addressing governance issues only after damage has occurred,” said Joseph Omondi, executive director of the Midrift Rights Network.
The national government has urged MCAs to reclaim their constitutional mandate.
Last week, Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi challenged ward representatives to reclaim their oversight role over governors.
“You are the ones supposed to oversee county governments. Reclaim your role in providing accountability,” he said.
Since the advent of devolution in 2013, counties have received more than Sh4 trillion in equitable share and conditional allocations, according to the National Treasury.
“From 2013–14 to 2024–25, county governments have cumulatively received Sh4.04 trillion,” the Treasury said.
Despite the massive inflows, public confidence in devolution is increasingly mixed.
In several counties, residents say the funds have not translated into visible infrastructure, reliable health services or sustainable economic opportunities.
The perception that a few individuals are siphoning off billions is fuelling frustration and eroding trust in local governance.
The accountability crisis now threatens the credibility of devolution itself.
Without stronger investigative action, clearer separation between oversight and political ambition, and better-resourced county assemblies, the flow of public funds risks continuing without effective scrutiny.
For citizens, the stakes are simple: whether devolution delivers development or becomes a conduit for unchecked spending.
Comments 0
Sign in to join the conversation
Sign In Create AccountNo comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!