Forget ten-point lies, Nadco report coming along nicely

A document circulating under the title 'The ten-point lies' claims to offer a citizens’ audit of the broad-based government. Yet rather than a rigorous evaluation, it reads more like a political manifesto designed to delegitimise ongoing governance efforts. Its method is simple: elevate narrative over evidence, substitute anecdotes for data, and dismiss documented progress in law, finance and institutional reform.

In contrast, the Zani committee report functions as a formal record of government action. It chronicles the realities of governing: drafting legislation, allocating funds, restructuring institutions and stabilising the national economy. Importantly, the report does not claim perfection. Instead, it offers a transparent account of progress made within the constraints of constitutional governance.

The Linda Wananchi paper reaches its dramatic one-out-of-ten verdict through familiar distortions. First, it dismisses parliamentary legislative work as no progress, ignoring that bills must pass defined constitutional stages before becoming law. Second, it replaces systemic evidence with isolated anecdotes. Third, it shifts the goalposts, demanding instant perfection instead of recognising corrective policy trajectories.

Placed side by side, the difference is clear. One document relies on verifiable records, legislative milestones and budgetary data. The other leans on grievances, digital chatter and misunderstandings about how constitutional governance unfolds.

Consider the debate over the implementation of the National Dialogue Committee report. Critics argue that the agenda stalled completely. Yet official records show all nine proposed bills moving through Parliament. Three are already law, including the IEBC (Amendment) Act 2024, while others remain in mediation or committee stages. The electoral commission now operates with sworn commissioners and has resumed by-elections while preparing for boundary delimitation.

Inclusivity debates reveal similar contrasts. Critics cite a trending social media list as proof of exclusion. Yet policy records show Sh500 million in scholarships for marginalised learners, billions through the Equalisation Fund, millions under national health coverage and the recruitment of 100,000 teachers. Evidence matters.

Youth livelihoods are another example. The Nyota programme is often labelled a political slush fund. Yet programme data indicates more than 800,000 young people engaged across wards, with thousands gaining work experience, business training, start-up grants or certification through recognition of prior learning.

Integrity debates also benefit from legal clarity. Broad accusations about questionable reputations are common, but institutional reform is measured through law. The Conflict of Interest Act 2025 now provides enforceable rules to investigate and prosecute misconduct. Accountability requires definitions, and the statute supplies them.

Public debt criticism likewise deserves context. While opponents display alarming debt tables, the government has pursued stabilisation, including Eurobond buybacks, bilateral restructuring and improved credit outlooks. Financial markets rarely reward unsound fiscal management.

Anti-corruption reforms further illustrate the gap between narrative and evidence. The Anti-Money Laundering (Amendment) Act 2025 addresses regulatory gaps linked to greylisting. Digital procurement systems and expanded eCitizen services reduce opportunities for rent-seeking while billions in illicit schemes have been disrupted, assets recovered and convictions secured.

Austerity measures have also targeted wasteful spending. Government removed budgets for the offices of the First Lady and other spouses, froze purchases of new vehicles, curtailed non-essential travel and advanced reforms to eliminate failing state corporations.

Judicial capacity has expanded with new appellate judges, additional court infrastructure in several cities and mobile courts reaching remote communities. An executive intent on undermining courts seldom invests in widening access.

Ultimately, the Linda Wananchi critique asks citizens to ignore tangible developments: teachers in classrooms, youth receiving grants, millions accessing health services, corruption funds recovered and governance laws enacted.

The Zani committee report does not claim perfection. It documents the steady, often difficult work of constitutional governance. Accountability matters, but it must rest on verifiable evidence. Cynicism alone cannot substitute for facts.

For Kenya, the choice is between evidence-based evaluation and politics of permanent outrage. Progress may be gradual, but institutions, laws and measurable outcomes show movement forward. Responsible critique should test facts, not erase them.

Strategic adviser on leadership, governance and public policy