WANJAWA: Youth inclusion just cosmetic without power and no decision-making role

To ensure structural change, Kenya’s youth must move beyond the politics of expectation and embrace the politics of organisation /FILE

As Kenya inches closer to the 2027 general election, one political theme is becoming increasingly dominant: youth empowerment. From policy speeches to public appointments, the political class is keen to demonstrate that it is listening to the country’s youthful majority.

The message is clear - young people are being brought into government, given visibility and positioned as partners in shaping the nation’s future. On the surface, this appears to be a welcome shift.

Under the current administration of President William Ruto, youth empowerment has been framed as both an economic and political priority.

Initiatives such as the Hustler Fund, youth-focused enterprise programmes and digital innovation platforms have been rolled out with the promise of unlocking opportunity. At the same time, young professionals have found their way into key government positions, reinforcing the narrative that the system is opening up.

But beneath this visible inclusion lies a more uncomfortable reality: the structure of power in Kenya remains largely unchanged. And that is where the problem begins.

Youth appointments, while symbolically powerful, operate within a political and economic system that was never designed to be inclusive. They offer presence without power, visibility without voice. In many cases, they serve to legitimise the very structures that continue to marginalise the majority of young people.

Take the economic dimension. Despite targeted funds and programmes, youth unemployment and underemployment remain stubbornly high. Access to capital is still mediated by bureaucracy, political connections and uneven information flows.

Many of the flagship initiatives, while well intentioned, function more as short-term relief mechanisms than as structural solutions to inequality and exclusion. They do not fundamentally alter the conditions that make economic participation difficult for millions of young Kenyans.

The political terrain is even more restrictive.

Running for office in Kenya remains an expensive affair. Campaigns are driven by money, networks and patronage. For most young people, especially those outside elite circles, the barriers to entry are simply too high.

What we are witnessing, therefore, is not a broad-based opening of political space, but a selective incorporation of a few young individuals into an otherwise closed system.

Political parties, which should serve as vehicles for democratic participation, have done little to change this reality. Internal democracy remains weak, nomination processes are often opaque and decision-making is heavily centralised.

Youth wings exist, but they are rarely sites of real influence. Instead, they function as mobilisation tools during elections - energised when votes are needed, sidelined when decisions are made.

Even within government, the limits of youth inclusion are evident. Young appointees operate within rigid hierarchies where strategic direction is determined elsewhere.

Their ability to influence policy is often constrained by institutional culture, political loyalty and the ever-present risk of alienating those who facilitated their rise.

This is why the growing assertiveness of Kenya’s youth should not be misunderstood.

Across the country - and especially in digital space - young people are organising, questioning and demanding accountability. They are no longer satisfied with symbolic gestures.

The rallying call of “nothing for us without us” is not about token representation; it is about meaningful participation in decision-making processes that affect their lives.

As 2027 approaches, there is a real risk that youth empowerment will be reduced to a campaign strategy - a language deployed to mobilise and manage votes without addressing the deeper structural issues at play. We have seen this before: promises made in the heat of political competition, only to dissipate once power is secured.

Kenya cannot afford a repeat of this cycle.

If youth inclusion is to be more than cosmetic, then the country must confront the harder question: how do we change the rules of the game?

First, there must be serious reform of campaign financing to lower the cost of political participation and create a more level playing field. Without this, leadership will remain the preserve of the wealthy and well-connected.

Second, political parties must be democratised. Transparent nomination processes, accountable leadership structures and genuine grassroots participation are essential if young people are to have a meaningful pathway into leadership.

Third, youth participation must be institutionalised in ways that go beyond consultation. This means embedding young people in decision-making processes with real authority - particularly in budgeting, policy formulation and oversight.

Finally, economic empowerment must move beyond funds and programmes to address structural inequality.This includes creating sustainable jobs, supporting innovation ecosystems and ensuring fair access to opportunities across regions and social groups.

Kenya’s youth are not just a voting bloc; they are the country’s present and its future. Ignoring their demands - or responding with half measures - risks deepening frustration and eroding trust in democratic institutions.

To ensure structural change, Kenya’s youth must move beyond the politics of expectation and embrace the politics of organisation. Structural change will not be handed down — it will be demanded, organised and secured.

If Kenya’s youth truly believe in “nothing for us without us”, then the task ahead is clear: not just to be included in the system, but to fundamentally remake it.