Kepha Omae takes oath of office as the new chairperson of the National Cohesion and Integration Commission on May 20, 2026 /LEAH MUKANGAIThe National Cohesion and Integration Commission was born out of the 2007-08 post-election violence, when Kenya confronted the devastating consequences of ethnic mobilisation, political competition and historical grievances.
Its establishment was an admission that restoring calm was not
enough; the country needed to address the conditions that made violence
possible.
Nearly two decades later, a difficult question confronts the commission: are we building the cohesive nation that inspired its creation, or have we become accustomed to managing the symptoms of a problem we have yet to confront decisively?
The contradiction between what NCIC citizens expect and what they experience demands honest scrutiny.
Kenyans expect an institution that anticipates hostility, confronts incitement impartially, investigates discrimination and delivers accountability. Yet recurring controversies raise questions about its visibility, effectiveness and impact.
The critical question is whether the agency has adopted an unduly conservative interpretation of its mandate, privileging caution over initiative, reaction over prevention and administrative activity over social transformation. Respect for evidence, due process and constitutional safeguards is essential; institutional timidity is not.
The NCIC Act envisages more than a hate-speech complaints desk. Its mandate encompasses harmonious relations, non-discrimination, education, mediation, research and policy advocacy. Yet the commission risks being defined by visible interventions during ethnic flare-ups while neglecting the deeper structures sustaining division.
National cohesion demands continuous engagement with institutions, political incentives and social inequalities that make ethnic mobilisation attractive.
Commissioners must honestly examine whether they are exercising their full statutory mandate or retreating into administratively comfortable, publicly visible activities while transformative opportunities remain unexplored.
NCIC’s credibility rests on impartial, consistent and constitutionally sound enforcement. Ethnic incitement must attract equal scrutiny regardless of political influence, social status or community identity, while allegations must be tested against evidence and established legal thresholds. Independence must be demonstrated through transparent procedures, defensible decisions and clear communication.
Equally, the commission must distinguish unlawful incitement and discrimination from offensive opinions, political disagreement and legitimate criticism of public institutions.
The objective is neither selective punishment nor indiscriminate policing, but fair, evidence-based accountability that protects both national cohesion and freedom of expression.
Kenya cannot overcome negative ethnicity while ignoring the political and institutional conditions that sustain it. Ethnic antagonism is rooted not merely in inflammatory speech but also in historical grievances, unequal access to opportunities, exclusion and the political exploitation of identity.
Where employment, resources and influence appear tied to ethnic connections, appeals for unity ring hollow. NCIC must therefore investigate patterns of discrimination, translate research into actionable policy recommendations and monitor implementation.
Dialogue must address concrete grievances rather than become an end in itself. Cohesion does not mean the absence of disagreement; it means managing differences without hostility or exclusion.
National unity must never silence legitimate demands for justice. Sustainable peace requires confronting inequalities, resolving grievances and holding institutions accountable.
To bridge the gap between public expectations and performance, NCIC must embrace three complementary roles. First, as a credible watchdog, it must anticipate risks, investigate impartially and communicate outcomes transparently.
Second, as a peacebuilder, it must sustain community engagement throughout the electoral cycle, partnering with schools, universities, religious institutions, civil society and media while empowering young people to challenge stereotypes and counter online incitement.
Third, as a reform advocate, it must expose discriminatory structures, propose actionable remedies and monitor implementation.
These roles are inseparable: accountability without prevention is reactive, peacebuilding without justice risks impunity, and recommendations without follow-through reduce NCIC to a commentator on problems it should help resolve.
TheKepha Omae-led commission has an opportunity to redefine NCIC’s institutional culture and public standing. They should begin by establishing a measurable performance framework that answers a simple question: what will be different in Kenya because this commission exists?
The scorecard should track not merely the number of activities undertaken but their outcomes: the timeliness and disposition of cases, consistency in enforcement, implementation of recommendations, disputes successfully mediated, evidence of reduced recurrence of targeted conflicts and changes in public confidence.
Such a framework would give the commissioners a stronger basis for demanding resources and legislative reforms. Before asking Parliament for additional powers, they should demonstrate which existing powers have been exercised, what obstacles were encountered and why further authority is necessary.
The government, Parliament, investigative agencies, prosecutors and Judiciary must equally play their parts. NCIC cannot deliver national cohesion alone. It needs adequate resources, operational independence and cooperation across institutions. But these legitimate requirements must accompany, rather than replace, an honest assessment of its own performance.
As Kenya approaches the 2027 general election, NCIC must safeguard more than the absence of violence; it must protect citizens’ ability to contest power without ethnic hostility.
Commissioners must not confuse caution with neutrality, meetings with progress or institutional survival with success.
While no institution can eliminate every source of tension, NCIC must fully exercise its mandate to strengthen accountability, prevent conflict and confront structural divisions.
Kenya needs a commission that transforms the conditions reproducing ethnic hostility. That is the true measure of national cohesion.
