Reports indicate that Kenya's e-Citizen platform could face collapse if the government proceeds with terminating its existing contract with the developers.

Despite previous claims from senior government officials, recently presented contract documents to the National Assembly Committee on Security and National Administration reveal that the platform is not entirely owned by the government.

The agreement, signed on May 25, 2023, specifies the terms for ongoing support and maintenance of the e-Citizen platform. Notably, it grants the private contractors—M/S Webmasters Kenya Limited, Pesa Flow Limited, and Olive Tree Media Limited—the authority to dismantle the system if the contract is terminated, regardless of the situation.

"In the event of termination, howsoever occurring, the Suppliers shall be entitled to rescind, withdraw or otherwise uninstall all their proprietary infrastructure and resources, including all technical infrastructure whether software or otherwise, that may have been deployed in order to enable them to provide their services under this Agreement," the contract reads.

Additionally, the contract absolves the suppliers of any liability in the event of termination, making the government responsible for compensating them for any claims, data loss, system outages, or service disruptions that may arise.

These disclosures have raised significant concerns within Parliament, leading two committees to initiate investigations into the agreement, driven by fears related to national security and potential financial risks.

"It’s very scary from a national security and financial standpoint," said Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma.

"We’ve tried severally to get answers from the State Department. The former PS insisted E-Citizen is fully government-owned, but the contract says otherwise."

Lari MP Mburu Kahangara expressed similar concerns, casting doubt on the reliability of previous statements made by government officials.

Echoing the alarm, Saku MP and Committee Vice-Chair Dido Raso raised questions about the legality of the contract, pointing out that it lacked the signature of the Principal Secretary for ICT—a key requirement for such agreements.

"I don’t see any PS signature on this document, yet the PS is the accounting officer. Why are such crucial contracts not properly endorsed?" Raso asked.

Committee Chair Gabriel Tongoyo slammed the ICT Department for allegedly trying to withhold the contract details from Parliament.

"We’ve been requesting this document for more than two months. It appears there was an intentional effort to conceal the facts, and that’s something we will not overlook," he stated.

The committee has now asked for additional time to thoroughly review the documents before summoning Principal Secretary Belio Kipsang to appear for questioning.