EACC sensitizes Bungoma MCAs on new conflict of interest law

The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) on Thursday briefed staff and Members of the County Assembly (MCAs) of Bungoma on the requirements of the new Conflict of Interest Act, 2025, which came into force in August.

The sensitization session, held at the Paskari Nabwana Hall, was led by EACC Deputy Director for Ethics Compliance Patrick Owiny, accompanied by Ethics Officer Awino Oluoch.

The commission outlined key provisions of the law, which introduces stricter rules for identifying, preventing and managing conflicts between public duties and private interests.

According to EACC, the Act requires public officers to proactively avoid situations where personal interests may interfere with objective decision-making, and to make timely declarations when actual, potential or perceived conflicts arise.

The commission highlighted Section 19 as one of the law’s most far-reaching reforms, fully prohibiting public officers from trading with or benefiting from contracts involving their own institutions.

Officers are barred from supplying goods, works or services to their reporting entities, participating in procurement processes where they hold private interests, or benefiting directly or indirectly from such contracts.

EACC also outlined new criminal sanctions introduced under the Act. Offences such as misuse of official information, preferential treatment, concealing conflicts of interest, accepting prohibited gifts and issuing false declarations now attract fines of up to Ksh.4 million or imprisonment for up to 10 years.

Corporations face fines of up to Ksh.10 million, in addition to mandatory penalties equal to twice the benefit gained or the loss caused.

Speaker of the County Assembly, Emmanuel Situma, welcomed the sensitization and urged MCAs and staff to comply with the law, saying the Assembly would take firm action against violations.

Clerk of the Assembly, Charles Wafula, said the meeting was convened to ensure all officers understood the law’s requirements, noting that lack of awareness would not be accepted as a justification for non-compliance.