Tobacco use kills 6,000 Kenyans every year. The Ministry of Health and the board are tasked with preventing these deaths.
As Kenya commemorated the World No Tobacco Day on
May 31 last week,
attention turned to the
progress made over the 18 years since the Tobacco Control Act came into force.
The Kenya Tobacco Control Board, established under the Tobacco Control Act of 2007, was created to serve as a central advisory body guiding the government on tobacco regulation and public health protection.
Its primary responsibility is to advise the Cabinet Secretary for Health on matters concerning the production, manufacture, sale, advertising, promotion, sponsorship, and consumption of tobacco products.
Yet, nearly two decades later,
its effectiveness remains under scrutiny amid persistent structural challenges
and allegations of interference from powerful tobacco industry actors.
Despite these safeguards, evidence indicates that the tobacco industry has played an outsized role in influencing tobacco control policy in Kenya.
Before the enactment of the Tobacco Control Act in 2007, major tobacco companies British American Tobacco Kenya and Mastermind Tobacco Kenya were reported to have actively lobbied against the proposed legislation.
These efforts included organising exclusive retreats for Members of
Parliament, aimed at influencing their stance on the bill. In the years
following the Act’s passage, the industry has continued to resist regulation
through strategic litigation.
In recent times, growing concern has been expressed over the diminishing effectiveness of the Kenya Tobacco Control Board, which many now regard as the weakest link in the country’s tobacco control architecture.
The board has been unable
to take decisive action against industry interference.Originally established as a professional and independent advisory body, the board appears to have increasingly been bogged by tobacco industry inretference and succumbed to political interference, significantly undermining its mandate. Over the past three years, the board has experienced frequent leadership changes, including multiple appointments to the chairperson position, raising serious questions about its stability and susceptibility to political influence.
Additionally, there are credible reports suggesting that appointment positions on the board have been used as political rewards, with some appointees within the board allegedly promoting the interests of the tobacco industry from within contrary to the spirit and letter of the Tobacco Control Act.
As a result, the board has been reduced to what some observers describe as a “toothless dog that cannot bite,” unable to take decisive action against industry interference or uphold its public health responsibilities.
In one recent instance during the nation wide public participation process for a new round of graphic health warnings on tobacco and nicotine products, observers from civil society organisations reported that a number of tobacco control board representative demonstrated clear bias in favour of tobacco industry stakeholders, prompting concern among civil society groups.
Additionally, some board members have openly supported the concept of harm reduction a strategy often promoted by tobacco companies to push emerging products such as e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches. This has led to allegations that these individuals are acting more as industry lobbyists within the board than as public health advocates.
Furthermore, during public engagement events held across various regions, the tobacco industry was reportedly involved in disrupting proceedings by mobilising and hiring goons to shout down delegates who supported the proposed introduction of a new round of graphic health warnings on tobacco products. In addition to these tactics, the industry is believed to have spent significant sums possibly running into billions of shillings on lobbying, advertising, and promotional campaigns during the same period.
Media coverage of these events was widely perceived by observers to be skewed in favour of the industry, raising legitimate concerns about the influence of corporate advertising expenditure on media neutrality and editorial independence.
In light of these developments, many expected the Kenya Tobacco Control Board to take firm and decisive action against such interference. However, the board appeared helpless either unwilling or unable to respond, and no measures were taken to hold the tobacco industry accountable for its actions. This perceived inaction has further fuelled concerns about the board’s independence and effectiveness in fulfilling its mandate to protect public health.
Beyond external pressures, internal weaknesses have also stifled the board’s effectiveness. The board’s advisory mandate has occasionally clashed with the roles of the Ministry of Health Division Of Drugs And Substance Abuse with some ministry officials accusing the Tobacco Control Board of overstepping its boundaries into policy execution.
These role ambiguities have created unending friction and delayed the rollout of key interventions. In addition, the board has faced significant resource constraints. Inadequate funding, lack of a dedicated budget line within the Ministry of Health, and limited administrative capacity including even basic operational infrastructure have severely undermined its ability to fulfill its duties.
Experts and public health advocates argue that strengthening the Tobaco Control Act is crucial for Kenya to meet its national and international tobacco control obligations. There is a pressing need to clearly define the board’s advisory role to avoid overlapping responsibilities and improve coordination within the Ministry of Health.
Sustainable financial support is essential for operational functionality, research, and capacity building. Robust monitoring systems should be established to prevent industry interference, in line with the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). Additionally, greater transparency in board appointments, decision-making processes, and stakeholder engagement can help build public trust and ensure the board’s work remains aligned with national health priorities.
The writer (pictured) is the national coordinator of the Kenya Tobacco Control And Health Promotion Alliance (Ketca)
