By Valarie Waswa
The Kenyan government’s Maisha Namba project, aimed at modernizing the country’s identification system, has been met with both anticipation and scepticism. While the project holds the promise of improving access to services and streamlining government processes, it has also faced significant challenges related to public trust, data privacy, and the authenticity of public participation.
On August 30, 2024, the State Department of Immigration and Citizen Services convened a public participation meeting to gather feedback on the proposed amendments to the Births and Deaths Registration Rules 2024 and the Registration of Persons Rules 2024, which underpin the Maisha Namba project.
The Maisha Namba initiative, led by the Ministry of Interior and National Administration, seeks to modernize Kenya’s identification system by consolidating personal data and integrating it into one comprehensive digital ecosystem. The project aims to enhance the accessibility and efficiency of services such as healthcare, education, and social security, contributing to Kenya’s digital transformation goals.
KICTANet was among the various stakeholders present. These included civil society organizations, professional bodies, religious institutions, media representatives, and academia.
State Department officials presented the framework and objectives of the Maisha Namba system, emphasizing the legal foundations of the project. The presentations provided a detailed overview of the steps taken by the Ministry, including the proposed amendments to the two laws, the development of a Regulatory Impact Assessment, and consultations with stakeholders in meetings.
Key Concerns Raised by Stakeholders
The Maisha Namba project has been plagued by various legal and legitimacy challenges since its inception under the previous administration as “Huduma Namba”. Stakeholders have continued to raise critical concerns regarding the contentious digital ID project. A number of these were reiterated in the meeting, and include the following:
- Lack of Public Trust: One of the most prominent concerns was the lack of public trust in the government’s handling of personal data. Stakeholders at the meeting expressed scepticism about adopting the new digital ID system. The mistrust largely stems from past failures, such as the Huduma Namba initiative, and fears of potential misuse of personal data for unintended purposes, which concerns remain unaddressed.
- Data Protection and Privacy: a recurring question was on whether the government had conducted Data Privacy Impact Assessments (DPIAs), and if so, why these outcomes had not been made available to the public despite requests from stakeholders. Attendees demanded transparency in data security measures, particularly given the volume of personal information being collected under the Maisha Namba system. Concerns about data breaches and identity theft were also raised, with stakeholders requesting clarity on the systems in place to safeguard their sensitive data and calling for scrutiny by the Office of the Data Protection Commission (ODPC).
- Transition Mechanisms for Data: Stakeholders also questioned the process by which existing personal data under the Integrated Population Registration System (IPRS) would be transitioned into the Maisha Namba database. Also, they sought to know how the government would ensure the integrity and security of this vast trove of data during and after the transition.
- Meaningful Public Participation and Tokenism: Another major point of contention was the nature of the public participation process itself throughout the process of Huduma and Maisha Namba. Many stakeholders felt that during such meetings, presentations by government representatives often dominated the meeting, leaving insufficient time for the public to express their views. Furthermore, some participants noted that several attendees appeared to be “yes-men,” strategically placed to support the government’s proposals without critically engaging with the amendments. This raised questions about the authenticity of the public consultation and whether it was truly aimed at inclusive dialogue. Moreover, despite stakeholders giving feedback to the Ministry on the various points of contention, many concerns remain unaddressed. This raised the broader issue of whether public participation would genuinely influence decision-making.
- Discrepancies in Documentation: There were also concerns about discrepancies between the hard copies of the proposed amendments distributed during the meeting and the versions available on the Ministry of Interior’s website. For instance, differences in the processing fees for identification documents were noted, sparking confusion and frustration among stakeholders.
Building Trust Through Genuine Engagement
In response to the concerns raised, the State Department reiterated its commitment to aligning the Maisha Namba project with the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and other relevant legislation. Officials assured stakeholders that the government would continue integrating public feedback as the system is gradually rolled out. The incremental rollout, they argued, would allow for careful monitoring and adjustment to ensure that the system serves new applicants efficiently and securely.
However, while these assurances may seem promising, the public remains cautious. The issues highlighted—particularly regarding data privacy, security, and the authenticity of public participation—suggest that there is still much work to be done to foster trust.
Without clear communication and tangible safeguards, concerns about the misuse of data, exclusion of vulnerable populations, and lack of transparency will persist. For the Maisha Namba project to succeed, the government must not only implement robust cybersecurity and data protection measures but also actively engage with the public in a manner that is both inclusive and transparent.
The public participation process must be more than a formality—it should be a meaningful dialogue that genuinely incorporates public input into the policy-making process. This will be crucial for building public confidence in the Maisha Namba project, ensuring that it is viewed not as an imposition but as a step towards a more inclusive, accessible, and secure digital identity system.
A Path to Inclusivity?
As Kenya moves towards a unified digital identity system, the Maisha Namba project holds great promise for modernizing service delivery and improving access to essential services. However, the success of the project hinges on the government’s ability to address public concerns and foster a genuine partnership with its citizens.
For Maisha Namba to truly be a path to inclusive digital identity, the government must prioritize transparency, data protection, and meaningful public participation at every stage of implementation. Only then can it gain the trust of the Kenyan people and achieve its goal of creating an efficient and secure national ID system.
Ms Valarie Waswa, Legal Fellow – KICTANet
