Kenya slides further down the global corruption rankings index

NAIROBI: IN today’s global economy, a country’s reputation for transparency and accountability is almost as important as its natural resources or workforce.

Kenya, a nation widely recognised as East Africa’s economic powerhouse, still faces governance challenges that hinder its ability to reach its full economic potential, especially as the country prepares for the next general election in 2027.

According to the 2024 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index report, the Kenya entry is not what most Kenyans would like to hear.

Kenya ranks 130 out of 182 countries, with a score of 30 out of 100 points, down from 32 points in 2024, signalling that the war against corruption is being lost despite years of reforms and anti-graft pledges.

(See kenyans. co.ke on Kenya Drops 9 Places to 130 in 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index). Although corruption is not unique to Kenya, the country’s position in global rankings highlights systemic governance weaknesses that carry serious economic implications.

These effects go beyond government institutions, influencing investment flows, public infrastructure development, private-sector competitiveness and citizens’ overall welfare, with multiplier effects on other economic sectors.

The ranking in Kenya underscores the ongoing governance weaknesses that continue to undermine economic growth, elevate public debt pressures and diminish trust in government, despite the fact that rankings alone do not completely represent the complexity of corruption.

The cost of corruption remains unacceptably high for a country that aspires to become a middle-income economy, a regional centre for finance and innovation and the Singapore of the EAC economic region. Kenya has undoubtedly achieved significant economic progress in the last two decades.

Nairobi has emerged as a regional business and logistics centre, connecting East and Central Africa, as a result of the country’s development of one of Africa’s most dynamic technology sectors, which is anchored by innovations such as mobile money services and digital financial platforms.

However, the most recent report indicates that corruption in Kenya remains a structural challenge that poses a risk of impeding this progress.

When ingrained in public institutions, corruption distorts decision-making processes, undermines efficiency and erodes public trust.

Rather than being allocated according to economic priorities, public resources are allocated to initiatives that present opportunities for private profit.

Ultimately, the economic growth and development outcomes that benefit a small number of individuals are weakened by this misallocation of resources.

One of the immediate economic effects of corruption is its influence on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).

International investors evaluate governance risks, regulatory transparency and the stability of public institutions alongside market size and natural resources.

This means that Kenya, ranked 130 out of 180 countries, is considered as high corruption risks. Such perceptions create more barriers to investment, as investors worry about the fairness of contracts, the transparency of procurement procedures and the need for unofficial payments to secure regulatory approvals.

These uncertainties raise the cost of doing business and encourage investors to consider alternative locations. Kenya must acknowledge that Rwanda and Botswana have prioritised governance reforms as an essential component of their economic strategies.

Consequently, these countries are now regarded as dependable locations for long-term investment in Africa, in contrast to Kenya. Kenya has allocated substantial funds to major infrastructure projects aimed at transforming the economy through infrastructural investments.

ALSO READ: Kenya’s fiscal squeeze: Why current economic trends threaten the future of public services

Kenyan President William Ruto acknowledged at the 25th meeting of the EAC in Arusha that Tanzania’s SGR is a prime example of regional investment, emphasising the importance of roads, railways, ports and energy developments in supporting trade and industrialisation.

This statement may have been influenced by his views on SGR developments in Kenya. Corruption substantially increases the expense of these initiatives, regardless of Kenyans’ disagreements.

When transparency and supervision are lacking, public procurement systems are especially susceptible to manipulation.

Contracts may be awarded at exorbitant prices, or companies may be chosen based on their political connections rather than their technical expertise.

For Kenya, based on various sources (for details, see Highway Robbery by the Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG), which traces the corruption trend in Kenya), a frequently cited example is the Standard Gauge Railway, which connects the port city of Mombasa to the capital, Nairobi.

While the railway has improved cargo transport efficiency, concerns have been raised about the project’s high construction costs and financing structure.

When corruption drives up infrastructure costs, the economic consequences are significant.

Public debt increases, taxpayer resources are wasted, infrastructure returns fall below expectations and ultimately, citizens pay the price through higher taxes, reduced public services, or increased borrowing.

Those who take the time to read Highway Robbery by the Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG) will be surprised by the findings that clearly indicate significant budget irregularities in key sectors such as roads, electricity and water, revealing a systemic problem of ‘budgeted corruption’ that weakens governance and accountability in Kenya.

While corruption often appears as a high-level political issue, its most immediate impact is often felt by small businesses.

In Kenya, most of the entrepreneurs I spoke to after the Arusha 25th Head of State meeting, convened by the chairman, President Ruto, said openly that they frequently encounter bureaucratic hurdles when trying to obtain licences, permits, or regulatory approvals.

In fact, one interviewed businessman in Kajiado said corrupt practices, such as processes involving unofficial payments or favouritism, have now become common. Large corporations may have the resources and connections to navigate such systems.

Small and mediumsized enterprises, however, often struggle. For many Kenyan entrepreneurs, corruption effectively becomes an additional informal tax, discouraging innovation and limiting business expansion.

The consequences extend beyond individual businesses. When small firms cannot grow, job creation slows and economic opportunities become limited, especially for young people entering the labour market. Hence, in Kenya, corruption is weakening public finances in two key ways.

First, it reduces government revenues. Tax evasion and bribery within customs and revenue authorities undermine the effectiveness of tax collection systems and second, corruption increases public spending through inflated procurement contracts and mismanaged projects.

Consequently, the Kenyan government is increasingly reliant on borrowing as a result of the fiscal pressure resulting from the combination of increasing expenditures and declining revenues.

This situation is well-explained by certain members of the Kenyan parliament. In the past few years, Kenya’s ballooning public debt has been the subject of national discourse.

Although borrowing is frequently required to finance development, corruption undermines the efficacy of public spending and complicates debt management.

Future generations may be burdened with repayment obligations without experiencing the advantages of development when borrowed funds are not utilised effectively.

In a world that is becoming more interconnected, the reputation of governance has become a vital economic asset.

The credibility of their institutions influences the competition among countries, alongside labour costs and natural resources.

An inadequate corruption ranking, as Kenya’s is, can affect how Kenya is perceived by international partners, including development finance institutions and multilateral lenders.

Kenya must understand that many nations have successfully reduced corruption and improved their governance rankings through deliberate reforms.

For instance, Singapore, a country that Kenyans are considering, has enacted strict anti-corruption laws, strengthened independent investigative agencies and ensured competitive pay for public employees.

Similarly, Rwanda is focusing on the digitalisation of public services and the reinforcement of accountability institutions to reduce the risk of abuse.

These examples demonstrate that corruption is not an inherent part of governance. The current lack of meaningful change in Kenya is due to an absence of strong political commitment and institutional reforms.

To improve its corruption ranking and boost economic performance, Kenya needs several key reforms.

First, digitising public services can greatly reduce opportunities for corruption.

Online licensing, digital tax payments and e-procurement platforms minimise direct contact between citizens and officials. Second, anti-corruption agencies must be empowered and shielded from political interference.

Investigations should result in prosecutions and convictions if public trust is to be restored and thirdly, judicial reforms are vital.

Corruption cases often take years to resolve, undermining accountability. Faster and transparent judicial processes would enhance enforcement.

Fourth, it is essential to enhance transparency in public procurement. Publishing government contracts and project budgets would allow citizens, journalists, and civil society organisations to scrutinise public expenditure more effectively.

Ultimately, civic engagement and a free press are crucial. Investigative journalism has played a key role in uncovering corruption scandals and promoting accountability.

Kenya is at a crucial economic crossroads, as shown by all ratios and economic indicators.

I am not aware of the sentiments of Kenyans. The country has immense potential, with a strategic geographic location, a youthful and dynamic population and a growing technology sector.

However, corruption continues to hinder the realisation of this potential. Enhancing the country’s corruption ranking is not just about boosting one’s international reputation; it also involves ensuring that public resources are used with value for money to build roads, schools and hospitals and to create opportunities for future generations.

The economic impact of corruption is simply too significant to ignore.

The key question now is whether Kenya’s leaders and institutions are prepared to address it with the necessary urgency and determination.