The Artificial Intelligence Bill (2026) sponsored by Senator Karen Nyamu in April has been rejected in its current form by the Senate’s Standing Committee on Information, Communication and Technology (the Committee). This is following public participation via written memoranda submitted to the committee by 143 stakeholders comprising government agencies, statutory bodies, professional associations, civil societies and individual citizens.[1] The Committee has produced a report on the Bill and the various recommendations of the stakeholders.
The main concerns highlighted by stakeholders were that the Bill seeks to regulate AI in an overly broad manner with punitive measures which may stifle the Kenya digital and innovation ecosystem. Stakeholders submitted that imprisonment for technical non-compliance in the Bill could be substituted with proportionate sanctions such as turn-over fines. The stakeholders also highlighted that institutional synergy with the Ministry of Information Communication and the Digital Economy (MICDE), to establish a comprehensive policy is vital as AI is fast changing thus difficult to predict emerging trends. They further emphasised that the Bill assumes a level of centralised regulatory control while AI systems are developed, trained and deployed across distributed multi-actor and cross-border environments.[2] This model of control is likely to contradict and overlap with existing regulatory bodies.[3]
The Bill is overly aligned with the European Union regulatory model that does not reflect the Kenyan reality. It does not reflect the Kenya digital ecosystem and local AI usage failing to recognise that Kenyan AI users often do not build foundational models but integrate existing, foreign platform AI tools into local applications.[4] The Bill is therefore premature and risks duplication as there is a National AI and Emerging Technologies Policy being drafted. The Bill in its current state is likely to suffocate domestic talent, increase operational costs and possibly drive technological investments to more flexible jurisdictions.[5]
Following the various submissions from the stakeholders, the Committee acknowledged that there were positive governance initiatives proposed by the Bill but the consensus among stakeholders is that there exists an evident gap in the national policy framework.[6]
The Committee after considering stakeholder submissions recommended that the Senate does not proceed with the AI Bill.[7] This will allow the MICDE to finalise and gazette the National AI and Emerging Technologies Policy which will guide subsequent legislation.
Footnotes
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 7. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 7. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 89. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 165. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 134. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 164. ↩
- Report on the Artificial Intelligence Bill (No. 4 of 2026), 2026, 169. ↩
Swahili 
English