Terrorist groups like al-Shabaab, ethnic violence, petty criminals, and corruption threaten Kenya’s security. The East African country has relied heavily on an unregulated and partially corrupt private sector to maintain stability. The industry employs more than 400,000 men and women who act as guards for homes, compounds, malls, airports, and the like. Kenya’s police forces, on the other hand, employ only 80,000 people.
Because of this, the government depends on private security firms for both resources and intelligence. Phil Figgins, an advisor to the British military’s Peace Support Team in East Africa, notes that the industry has evolved from a purely gate-guarding sector to an intelligence-collection and sharing one.
In an effort to better coordinate resources and information to adequately secure what Figgins – who previously worked in Kenya at a security-related organization– calls a “medium-risk country,” Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta recently signed into law the Private Security Regulation Act.
The Act can be traced back to extreme violence nine years ago, following a contested presidential election in December 2007. More than 1,000 people were killed and more than 300,000 displaced, after the leader of the opposition Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), Raila Odinga, accused then Kenyan president Mwai Kibaki of stealing the election. The peace deal, ending the violence and establishing a power-sharing arrangement, contained a section about reforming Kenya’s security sector to prevent this kind of chaos, explains Amar Taylor, founder and director of AUA Industria (a private security firm in Kenya).
The Act – finally signed into law by President Kenyatta on May 18 – states its aim as “to provide for the regulation of the private security industry, to provide for a framework for cooperation with National Security Organs; and for connected purposes.”
Taylor says that with this new Act, “It's likely that every guarding company will have an embedded intelligence officer within the company to collect and collate intelligence and share these with the government. Right now, if there is something suspicious going on, there is no clear framework on how to share this information with government security agencies.”
Tony Sahni – director at Kenyan private security firm Securex Agencies, and the former chairman of the Kenya Security Industry Association (KSIA) – echoes Taylor, telling The Cipher Brief he looks forward to “the establishment of a platform in which we can improve intelligence-sharing between various players in the sector.” With this, he says, “I am convinced that the new law will have a significant positive contribution to Kenya’s stability and to the war on terror.”
In addition to boosting intel-sharing, the Act is designed to stamp out corruption and improve best practices within the industry, ensuring citizens and companies receive adequate security. This is another plus of the law, according to Sahni and Taylor.
However, Figgins raises some doubts, noting that it is possible the law was created by the government and influential members of the private security community to hinder competition. Figgins stresses he is not sure this is the case, but it is always a possibility.
There is also the concern the government may be enacting this law largely to make money, says Figgins. The Act stipulates that individuals and corporations must now pay fees to the Authority in order to register themselves as legitimate service providers. In addition, a new Private Security Fidelity Fund, which will impose a levy on all registered private security providers, is being set up.
For now, though, the Act looks promising, in terms of its goals to fight corruption in the private security industry and to coordinate both intelligence-sharing and resources between the private sector and the government – efforts that support Kenya’s 2008 peace deal. “It’s not perfect, but it’s a positive step in the right direction,” says Taylor.
Kaitlin Lavinder is a reporter at The Cipher Brief.
