Election financing is a key determinant of election outcomes (Destri, 2022; Mendilow 2018). Consequently, its effective management has implications for Kenya’s democratic resilience. To unearth the nature of election campaign financing in Kenya, this paper first provides context by discussing money, politics, and democratic accountability. This is followed by a discussion on dimensions of campaign financing, issues in regulating campaign financing, institutional constraints, and the pathways for reforming election financing and improving the integrity of elections in Kenya.
Financing is required for identification of candidates at party primaries, political activities by campaign teams; research for preparation of manifestos; development of campaign materials, advertisements, and political marketing; logistics; mobilizing voters; and continually developing strategies to counter opponents. Across the globe, the funding of elections remains a concern due to a progressive increase of cost over the years and the deepening of winner-take-all politics (Falguera et al 2014). The cost of running for office undermines political participation of many potential candidates, in particular women, youth, and marginalized groups (Falguera et al 2014, 39). It also remains a major constraint to building mechanisms for accountability because it interlinks money with political power (Okeke and Nwali 2020).
The use of money in politics and the lack of transparency in sources of funding and how resources are used has potential of contributing to corruption and the manipulation of voters (Hamada and Agrawal 2025a). It could lead to the voices of those who provide funding being louder than the voices of voters themselves. That is, those with money can influence political decisions in a manner that undermines democracy. This could constrain electoral competition or even allow vested interests to compromise the electoral outcome (Ohman 2013, 3). Overall, when candidates for electoral office buy their way into political leadership, they may prioritize recouping their investment as opposed to serving public interest (Transparency International 2025). In turn, this leads to low public trust of those elected through manipulated processes and illicit money (International IDEA 2017).
In Kenya and elsewhere in Africa, the role of money in politics has been a concern, especially because politics and businesses often intertwine, thereby leading to corruption and abuse of office by public leaders. Mwangi (2008) argues that corrupt political financing has become more prevalent since the reintroduction of multiparty competitive politics in the 1990s. The need to regulate political financing to ensure accountable political participation has therefore remained an important issue and shaped the provisions of the 2010 Constitution. In particular, Article 88 (4) (i) of the Constitution of Kenya mandates that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) regulate “the amount of money that may be spent by or on behalf of a candidate or party in respect of any election.” (Republic of Kenya 2010, Art 88 (4) (i)) This constitutional mandate is operationalized through the Election Campaign Financing Act (ECFA), enacted in 2013 to give effect to this provision and establish the legal framework for managing campaign expenditure (Republic of Kenya 2013). However, despite the passage of this law, the envisioned operational framework remains absent. The Act was due to be applied in 2017, but Parliament postponed its application to 2022. Again, this was suspended (Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission 2024).
In 2021, the IEBC developed draft electoral campaign financing regulations, but Parliament (the National Assembly) declined to approve these regulations. While Parliament defended this rejection by arguing that IEBC did not seek parliamentary approval before publishing its regulations, critics in civil society argued that politicians were defending their campaign finance sources from legitimate scrutiny (Mutai 2021; Owino 2021). Following litigation by civil society activists, the High Court declared that “the spending-limit provisions of the Election Campaign Financing Act (Sections 12, 18, and 19) – which empower IEBC to set caps and disclosure requirements do not call for parliamentary approval, but must be subjected to appropriate public engagement.” (Katiba Institute et al v. IEBC et al and the Law Society of Kenya 2022) The court effectively removed the roadblocks that had allowed Parliament to frustrate previous attempts at regulating campaign financing.
With this resolution of legal uncertainties, attention has now shifted to the implementation of the election campaign ahead of the 2027 elections. The IEBC has drafted an Election Campaign Financing (Amendment) Bill 2024 aimed at removing previous bottlenecks and strengthening spending limits and disclosures (Owino 2025). If legislators approve the IEBC proposal and the electoral management body proceeds to formulate regulations through public participation, Kenya might have operational election campaign regulations before the next general elections in 2027. In addition to the ECFA, the Political Party Act (PPA) establishes the Political Parties Fund, a state fund that allocates money to qualified political parties on the basis of their electoral performance in the last election. (Republic of Kenya 2011 The PPA also prohibits political parties from receiving funds from foreign governments, except for technical assistance with the consent of the Registrar of Political Parties.