Kenya can't be sovereign if national interests are ignored

I have spent a lot of time recently thinking of the foundational sentence in our Constitution. It is short, declarative, and absolute. Article 4(1) states: “Kenya is a sovereign Republic.”

But what does it actually mean to be a Sovereign Republic in 2026? Does it mean simply having a flag, a seat at the UN and a national anthem? Or does it demand something deeper; a literal and philosophical manifestation of our independence in every single policy we enact, every treaty we sign, and every budget we pass?

The 2010 Constitution does not set out a separate, exhaustive list headed “National Interests.” That is an open-ended proposition that can be exploited positively or nefariously. I submit that Article 4(1) is not just a historical statement; it is Kenya’s foundational, material national interest. However, as I evaluate our current trajectory, I am forced to ask: is our sovereignty being protected, or quietly brokered away?

To answer this, I rely heavily on the work of the Kenya National Interface Team (KNIT). KNIT describes itself as a multidisciplinary, gender-balanced national think tank established in 2018, dedicated to advancing social justice, human dignity, and livelihoods of Kenyans.

Guided by the African philosophy of Utu, encompassing human dignity and relational personhood, and an unwavering commitment to constitutional governance, KNIT undertakes continuous action research to develop policy proposals. They focus on everything from constitutional compliance and debt management to electoral justice and devolution.

What makes KNIT’s work compelling is how their analyses converge on the gap between constitutional aspiration and constitutional practice. Take our public debt, for instance. KNIT’s special report on the Economic Cost of Constitutional Violations paints a devastating picture. They estimate that between 2010 and 2026, unconstitutional debt accumulation, elite tax exemptions, and unaccounted public expenditure have cost Kenya a staggering Sh18.7 trillion to Sh28.4 trillion. That is larger than our entire national debt.

When we allow IMF conditionalities to dictate our fiscal parameters behind closed doors, or when we contract odious debts that bypass Article 211 of the Constitution, we are not just making bad economic choices. We are philosophically and literally surrendering our Sovereign Republic to external creditors and the autochthonous-comprador nexus, a class of domestic elites who broker state power to foreign capital.

Is this what our freedom fighters envisioned? The issue of sovereignty also dominates our natural resource management. I look at KNIT’s evaluations of the Mrima Hill rare earths tender and the Dangote Lamu Refinery, and I see a Think Tank asking the exact questions I have been asking. Why are we so eager to award extraction rights without verifiable geological data? Why are we allowing foreign powers to bid for our critical minerals without enforceable downstream processing guarantees?

KNIT argues persuasively that a true sovereign does not just host foreign investment; it captures the value chain. They propose a strict National Interest Exposure Matrix to test whether major projects, like the Dangote refinery, actually serve our energy security and economic sovereignty, rather than simply occupying our coastal land.

And let us not forget the philosophical manifestation of our Republic. A sovereign state must reflect the will of its people, not just the arithmetic of an ethnic coalition or the whims of a political broker. KNIT’s analytical framework explicitly warns that ethnic mobilisation is often used as a vehicle to sustain political patronage, keeping the deeper issues of economic justice off the ballot. True national unity is not just a multi-ethnic coalition sharing the spoils of state power; it is a coalition that changes the underlying political-economic structure to benefit the mwananchi.

I am also deeply disturbed by the state of our public finance and leadership integrity. How can we claim to be a sovereign Republic when the Executive openly defies court orders? When we witness the unconstitutionality of the NG-CDF, which bypasses devolved county governments? When KNCHR is sidelined in compensating victims of state brutality?

KNIT’s Constitutional Accountability Series exposes this systemic deficit. It is not a partisan issue. The violations span Kibaki, Kenyatta and Ruto. The pattern is clear: a political economy that subordinates the Constitution to executive convenience. So, where do we go from here?

I believe we must adopt a constitutional developmental state doctrine, as KNIT’s recent board papers suggest.

We do not have to choose between being a constitutional state and a developmental state. We can be a state powerful enough to plan and coordinate our economy, yet disciplined enough to remain accountable to the Constitution.

To do this, we must make the Sovereign Republic of Kenya literal in our laws and philosophical in our minds. We must demand that all major public decisions, foreign treaties, and resource deals are subjected to the National Interest Exposure Matrix (NIEM) test: Does it serve the Kenya National Interest?