Title: Appeal Court Rules Doshi Family Cannot Jump Queue in Imperial Bank Liquidation

Kenya’s Court of Appeal has dismissed an application by businessman Ashok Doshi and his wife Amit Doshi seeking preferential treatment in the recovery of funds from the collapsed Imperial Bank Limited, dealing a significant blow to depositors hoping to fast-track claims against the defunct lender.

The Doshi family, whose deposits at the bank exceeded Sh1 billion at the time of its closure, had argued they deserved expedited repayment ahead of other creditors. The appellate bench, however, upheld the principle that all creditors must follow the established liquidation hierarchy, regardless of the size of their claims.

Imperial Bank was placed under receivership by the Central Bank of Kenya in October 2015 following the discovery of irregular banking practices that had seen insider lending and fraud drain the institution’s finances. The Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) took over its management and has been overseeing the winding-up process ever since.

The bank’s collapse was one of the most consequential in Kenya’s financial history, wiping out funds belonging to thousands of depositors ranging from small savers to large corporate clients. Several other banks, including Chase Bank, collapsed around the same period, prompting the CBK to tighten its supervisory framework and introduce stricter corporate governance requirements.

The court’s ruling reinforces the structured nature of insolvency proceedings under Kenyan law, where depositors are typically ranked ahead of unsecured creditors but must still wait their turn within that category. Legal experts say the decision signals that courts will not allow wealthy claimants to circumvent the orderly liquidation process simply on account of the scale of their exposure.

The Doshi family’s options now appear limited, with creditors still awaiting a timeline for further disbursements from the remaining asset pool.

Kenya’s organised private sector has put income tax relief at the centre of its budget priorities for the coming fiscal year, making the case that reducing the burden on salaried workers would produce economic returns far exceeding the short-term revenue cost to the government.

The proposal, advanced ahead of the Finance Bill 2026’s legislative passage, calls for a five percentage point reduction in Pay As You Earn rates. Proponents argue that Kenyan workers currently face one of the heavier personal income tax burdens in the East African region, with the top marginal PAYE rate of 35 percent applying at income levels that, given the cost of living in Nairobi and other urban centres, leave middle-income earners with limited discretionary spending power.

The economic logic behind the proposal centres on the multiplier effect of household consumption. When salaried workers retain more of their earnings, spending in retail, hospitality, transport, and services rises — sectors that are themselves significant employers and tax contributors. In a context where Kenya’s GDP growth has been uneven and private consumption has remained subdued, advocates argue that demand stimulation through tax relief represents a more reliable growth lever than continued public expenditure.

Kenya’s formal employment sector represents a relatively small share of the total workforce, but PAYE collections are among the most administratively efficient tax streams available to the Kenya Revenue Authority. Any rate reduction would require careful calibration to avoid widening the fiscal deficit at a time when the government is under pressure from both domestic borrowing costs and external creditors to demonstrate consolidation.

The Federation of Kenyan Employers and the Kenya Private Sector Alliance are among the bodies backing the proposal, which will require Treasury to weigh near-term revenue concerns against the medium-term case for growth-driven tax recovery.

Title: Smart Glasses Spark Privacy Debate as Wearable Technology Spreads Across East Africa

The quiet spread of wearable camera technology into everyday Kenyan life is triggering urgent questions about surveillance, consent and the adequacy of the country’s data protection framework, with experts warning that the law is struggling to keep pace with rapid hardware innovation.

Smart glasses — eyewear embedded with cameras, microphones and wireless connectivity — have begun appearing in Nairobi’s business districts, hospitality venues and public spaces, often worn without any visible indication to bystanders that they are being recorded. Unlike smartphones, which people broadly recognise as capable of capturing footage, smart glasses offer near-invisible recording that privacy advocates say fundamentally changes the consent dynamic.

Kenya enacted the Data Protection Act in 2019 and established the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, but enforcement resources remain limited and the legislation was drafted largely with conventional digital platforms in mind. Legal analysts note that the Act’s provisions on consent and data collection apply in principle to wearable devices, yet there are no specific regulations governing their use in public or semi-public environments.

The concern is particularly acute in commercial settings. Retailers, security firms and hospitality businesses in Nairobi and Mombasa have shown interest in the technology for loss prevention and customer analytics, applications that could involve systematic recording of members of the public without their knowledge.

East African technology policy researchers point to the European Union’s experience as a cautionary reference, noting that even heavily regulated markets have found it difficult to define clear boundaries around always-on wearable cameras.

Civil society groups are calling on the Communications Authority of Kenya and the Data Protection Commissioner to issue joint guidance before the technology becomes further entrenched, arguing that a proactive regulatory stance is far preferable to attempting to impose rules after widespread adoption has occurred.

Participants in Kenya’s capital markets are mounting a coordinated push to reform how share transactions are taxed, arguing that the current stamp duty structure penalises retail investors and constrains the growth of the Nairobi Securities Exchange.

Under the Finance Bill 2026, industry stakeholders have raised concerns about the flat-fee stamp duty applied to equity transactions, which they say creates a disproportionate cost burden for investors trading smaller volumes. Unlike a percentage-based levy that scales with transaction size, a flat fee consumes a significantly higher proportion of the value of modest trades, effectively pricing out smaller participants and discouraging the retail investment culture that deeper capital markets require.

The Nairobi Securities Exchange has for years grappled with thin trading volumes relative to its regional peers. Market capitalisation has fluctuated sharply with macroeconomic conditions, and daily turnover remains low compared with exchanges in South Africa, Nigeria, and Egypt. Industry advocates argue that reducing frictional costs on share transactions would encourage more frequent participation from individual investors, broaden the shareholder base of listed companies, and improve overall market liquidity.

Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority has been pursuing a broader agenda to deepen market participation, including efforts to expand the investor base among younger Kenyans and salaried workers through digital trading platforms. Stakeholders argue that stamp duty reform would complement those initiatives by ensuring that cost structures do not undermine accessibility.

The Finance Bill 2026 is currently subject to public participation, giving capital markets players a formal channel to table their proposals before the National Assembly. Whether Treasury accommodates those calls will depend partly on the revenue trade-off involved — and whether policymakers accept the argument that lower barriers to entry would ultimately generate greater market activity and a broader tax base over time.

Title: Kenyan Borrowers Get Day in Court as Activist Challenges Banks on Unilateral Rate Hikes

A legal challenge targeting the widespread practice by Kenyan commercial banks of raising loan interest rates and fees without prior notice or borrower consent has landed before the High Court, potentially setting the stage for a landmark ruling on consumer rights in the financial sector.

The petition, filed by an activist acting in the public interest, argues that banks have routinely adjusted loan terms mid-contract — increasing interest rates, penalty charges and administrative fees — without giving borrowers adequate notice or an opportunity to contest the changes. The suit seeks court orders restraining lenders from continuing the practice pending a full hearing.

The case arrives at a particularly sensitive moment for Kenyan borrowers. The Central Bank of Kenya’s benchmark lending rate has undergone significant movement over the past two years, and commercial banks have been quick to pass on rate increases to customers while critics allege they have been slower to reduce charges when the CBK cuts rates.

Under Kenya’s Banking Act and CBK guidelines, lenders are required to disclose the terms of credit facilities, including the basis on which variable rates may change. However, consumer advocates have long complained that the disclosure language buried in loan agreements gives banks wide latitude to adjust charges with minimal practical notice.

The Kenya Bankers Association has previously defended variable-rate lending as a necessary feature of a market where the cost of funds fluctuates, arguing that fixed-rate products carry higher base pricing that may ultimately cost borrowers more.

Consumer federation groups have welcomed the petition, noting that many Kenyans — particularly small business owners and individuals servicing multiple loans — have seen monthly repayment obligations increase sharply with little explanation from their lenders. A ruling in favour of the petitioner could compel Parliament to tighten the statutory framework around loan contract amendments.

Title: Machakos Cooperative Faces Governance Crisis After Members Oust Leadership

A farming and ranching cooperative society in Machakos County has been plunged into fresh uncertainty after its general membership convened to remove the sitting management committee, reflecting deepening frustration over the body’s handling of society affairs.

Members of the Katelembo Athiani Muputi Farming and Ranching Co-operative Society passed a vote of no confidence in the committee at a recent general meeting, accusing the leadership of financial mismanagement, lack of transparency and failure to account for society resources. The development marks the latest chapter in an extended governance dispute that has divided the society’s membership and undermined its operations.

Cooperatives play a central role in the agricultural economy of Machakos and the broader Ukambani region, providing farmers with collective bargaining power, access to inputs and shared marketing infrastructure. When governance breaks down, the consequences are felt directly in members’ livelihoods, with loan access, dividend payments and asset management all vulnerable to disruption.

The cooperative movement in Kenya is regulated by the Co-operative Societies Act and overseen by the State Department for Co-operatives, which has powers to inspect societies, appoint interim management and sanction officers found culpable of malpractice. Members of the Machakos society are expected to petition the department to facilitate a transition to new leadership and ensure a proper handover of accounts.

Disputes of this kind have become increasingly common across Kenyan cooperative societies, where elected committees sometimes resist accountability mechanisms and members lack the resources to pursue prolonged legal remedies.

County cooperative officers in Machakos said they were aware of the situation and would work to ensure that the transition followed the prescribed legal process, including verification of the meeting’s quorum and compliance with the society’s constitution before any new committee is formally recognised.

Title: Kenya’s Mining Sector Gripped by Licence Chaos as Joho Ministry Faces Heat

Persistent delays in licence approvals, escalating legal battles and unresolved community conflicts are casting a shadow over Kenya’s extractives sector, raising uncomfortable questions about governance at the Ministry of Mining, Blue Economy and Maritime Affairs under Cabinet Secretary Hassan Joho.

Investors and artisanal miners alike say the licensing process has become unpredictable, with applications stalling for months without explanation and some approved permits subsequently challenged by rival claimants in court. Industry insiders describe a backlog at the Mining Cadastre and National Mines and Geology Survey that has frustrated both small-scale operators and major exploration companies seeking to advance projects.

Kenya holds significant deposits of titanium, soda ash, coal, rare earth minerals and gemstones, and the sector has long been identified in successive government plans as an underexploited driver of economic diversification. Yet actual mining revenue has remained a fraction of its potential, a gap that analysts attribute partly to governance weaknesses.

Community tensions have added a further layer of complexity. In several counties including Kwale, Taita Taveta and Turkana, local residents have challenged mining operations on grounds of inadequate benefit-sharing, environmental concerns and displacement — issues that the existing legal framework under the Mining Act 2016 was meant to address through community development agreements but which remain contested in practice.

Allegations of corruption in the licensing process have surfaced in parliamentary committee hearings, though the ministry has denied systematic wrongdoing. CS Joho, who built his political profile as a combative Mombasa governor, now faces pressure from both the industry lobby and civil society to demonstrate that his ministry can deliver administrative efficiency alongside equitable resource governance.

The government has signalled ambitions to grow mining’s contribution to GDP significantly by 2030, a target that will require urgent reform of the licensing infrastructure.

Kenya’s energy sector is undergoing a structural overhaul as the government moves to renegotiate contracts with independent power producers, targeting provisions that have forced electricity consumers to pay for generation capacity left sitting idle on the national grid.

The Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority, working alongside the Ministry of Energy, is engaged in talks with multiple power companies to restructure agreements long criticised as unfavourable to Kenya Power, the state distribution utility. Central to the dispute are take-or-pay clauses, which obligate Kenya Power to pay for electricity regardless of whether it is actually dispatched to the grid.

These arrangements have contributed to a buildup of expensive excess generation that consumers ultimately absorb through their bills. Kenya’s retail electricity tariffs rank among the highest in sub-Saharan Africa relative to average incomes, a factor economists say undermines the competitiveness of local manufacturing and discourages industrial investment.

The renegotiations are also intended to compel renewable energy developers — operating wind, solar and geothermal plants — to install battery energy storage systems alongside their generation assets. Storage technology would allow producers to firm up variable output, reducing grid instability and lowering reliance on expensive diesel-powered emergency generation during peak demand.

Kenya has made substantial strides in clean power, with geothermal facilities in the Rift Valley and the Lake Turkana Wind Power project providing the majority of grid-connected electricity. However, the intermittent nature of wind and solar without storage has created technical and commercial complications for grid managers and dispatchers.

Consumer advocacy groups have welcomed the renegotiation effort but are pressing for any resulting savings to be passed directly to households and businesses rather than retained within the utility’s balance sheet.

Kenya’s pension industry manages assets exceeding Sh2 trillion, the overwhelming share of which is parked in government securities, and a growing body of analysts argues that redirecting even a fraction of those funds toward private enterprise could fundamentally alter the country’s investment landscape.

The Sh209 billion figure represents the portion of pension savings that could feasibly be allocated to private equity and direct business financing without breaching the Retirement Benefits Authority’s current prudential limits. Fund managers cite regulatory caution and a limited pipeline of credible private sector projects as reasons the industry has gravitated toward the predictable but economically inert returns offered by Treasury bonds and bills.

Reformers argue that adjusting the RBA’s investment guidelines to permit higher exposure to private equity, infrastructure funds and venture capital would unlock long-term capital for small and medium enterprises — a segment that employs the majority of Kenya’s workforce but consistently struggles to access patient financing from commercial banks.

Comparable shifts have occurred elsewhere on the continent. South Africa’s pension funds have become significant backers of infrastructure projects, while Rwanda has introduced targeted incentives to channel retirement savings toward priority development sectors. Kenya’s relatively sophisticated capital market infrastructure, anchored by the Nairobi Securities Exchange and a well-regulated custodian network, gives it the institutional capacity to execute similar reforms without exposing beneficiaries to undue risk.

Critics urge caution, citing past instances in which pension funds suffered losses on illiquid or poorly governed investments. They argue that any relaxation of investment rules must be accompanied by stronger fund governance standards, independent trustee oversight and mandatory disclosure of private market exposures, ensuring that ordinary savers are not made to bear the downside of policy-driven allocation decisions.

Kenya’s fiscal managers are weighing significant reductions to next year’s national spending plan as mounting economic headwinds force a rethink of priorities, with additional taxation remaining among the options under review.

The National Treasury is reviewing the Sh4.8 trillion budget for the 2026/27 fiscal year, according to officials familiar with the deliberations. Planners are under pressure to reconcile ambitious expenditure targets with a revenue base that has underperformed projections for consecutive years. The Kenya Revenue Authority missed its collection target by more than Sh100 billion in the 2024/25 financial year, compounding the challenge facing the exchequer.

Global factors are amplifying the strain. A stronger US dollar has raised the cost of servicing Kenya’s substantial external debt, which stood at approximately Sh5.1 trillion as of early 2026. Tightening conditions in international capital markets have made it more expensive to roll over commercial borrowings, including Eurobond repayments that absorbed significant resources in 2024.

Treasury officials have held consultations with the International Monetary Fund, which has pressed Kenya to narrow its fiscal deficit under the terms of an ongoing support programme. The arrangement conditions future disbursements on demonstrated fiscal consolidation measures.

Domestic obligations are equally pressing. The government must fund salaries for hundreds of thousands of public servants, service local debt through the Central Bank’s weekly Treasury bill auctions, and maintain constitutional transfers to counties under the equitable share formula.

Any new tax measures would require parliamentary approval. Lawmakers remain visibly cautious after a proposed Finance Bill was withdrawn in 2025 following deadly protests, and many are reluctant to publicly endorse fresh levies with the 2027 general election approaching.