NASSIR: Political Parties Fund: A test of Kenya’s democratic maturity

Central to this progress is the recognition that democracy does not sustain itself; it must be supported by strong institutions, among them, political parties and the frameworks that enable their effective functioning.

The transition to multiparty politics was a watershed moment. It expanded political space, allowed for ideological diversity and entrenched the principle that leadership must be contested.

Yet, in its early years, the system revealed structural weaknesses. Chief among them was the uneven capacity of political parties to organise and compete.

Without a fair and predictable system of financing, many parties, particularly those outside government, were constrained in their ability to mobilise, communicate and present coherent alternatives to the electorate.

It is in response to this historical imbalance that public funding for political parties was institutionalised. The Political Parties Fund was designed not as a discretionary benefit, but as a constitutional instrument to safeguard pluralism.

By providing resources based on electoral performance, it sought to level the playing field, reduce dependence on opaque funding sources and ensure that political competition is anchored in ideas rather than financial asymmetry.

This vision was championed by reform leaders who understood that democracy must be both accessible and sustainable. Our founding leader, Raila Odinga, consistently emphasised that the right to form political parties must be matched by the means to sustain them.

The objective was clear: to entrench a system where parties are stable institutions capable of engaging citizens, shaping policy and holding government to account.

Importantly, this reform ethos is shared across Kenya’s political leadership. President William Ruto, as a founding member of ODM and a participant in the broader reform movement, is well versed in the rationale underpinning equitable political party funding.

His own political journey has been shaped within a system that increasingly recognised the need for fairness in competition and institutional support for parties.

In this regard, the current moment should be approached with clarity. The commitment to political party funding is already established in law and policy.

The role of leadership at the highest level has been to affirm and uphold these principles, ensuring that the democratic framework remains intact. The focus, therefore, must shift to the operational level whereby implementation is executed and where timelines, allocations and disbursements are determined.

This is where the National Treasury assumes critical responsibility. As the custodian of public finances, the Treasury is charged with translating policy commitments into actual resource flows.

It is within its mandate to ensure that the Political Parties Fund is disbursed in a timely, transparent and predictable manner, consistent with both the law and the broader objectives of democratic governance.

Supporting the President’s commitment to strengthening institutions requires that the Treasury fully aligns its execution with this mandate. The Finance Cabinet Secretary, with prior experience as national chairman of ODM, is uniquely positioned to appreciate the strategic importance of this issue, not only from a fiscal perspective, but from a governance standpoint.

This dual perspective should inform a proactive approach that prioritises the integrity of party funding as a cornerstone of democratic stability.

The benefits of effective implementation are clear. Properly funded political parties are better equipped to develop policy platforms, maintain organisational structures and engage meaningfully with citizens.

They contribute to a more informed electorate and a more substantive political discourse. In turn, this enhances the overall quality of governance by ensuring that competition is grounded in ideas, performance and accountability. Conversely, delays or inconsistencies in disbursement undermine these gains.

They weaken party capacity, constrain outreach and risk shifting political financing toward less transparent channels. Such outcomes do not serve the interests of democracy, nor do they reflect the intent of the legal framework that Kenya has painstakingly developed over the years.

Kenya has reached a stage in its democratic evolution where the emphasis must be on fidelity to implementation. The laws are in place, the principles are well established and the leadership commitment is evident. What remains is the consistent execution of these commitments by the institutions mandated to do so.

In this context, the National Treasury is called upon to play its full part in supporting the President Ruto’s broader democratic agenda. By ensuring the timely and complete disbursement of political party funds, it will be reinforcing the institutional foundations upon which Kenya’s democracy rests. This is not merely a technical obligation but a strategic contribution to national stability, inclusivity, and progress.

Ultimately, the strength of Kenya’s democracy will be measured not only by its laws, but by how faithfully they are implemented. By aligning policy intent with administrative action, and by ensuring that institutions function as designed, the country can continue to build a political system that is fair, resilient, and reflective of the aspirations of its people.

The writer is the Mombasa governor and ODM deputy leader