The recent events at the Competition Authority of Kenya have raised serious questions about accountability and governance, with the focus now squarely on the institution’s Director General, David Kemei.
While the government moved swiftly to replace the Authority’s Chairman, Kemei has retained his position despite facing allegations of misconduct and being past the mandatory retirement age.On June 26, 2026,
President William Ruto issued Gazette Notice No. 9603, revoking the appointment of Charles W. Mahinda as Non-Executive Chairperson of the CAK.
Mahinda had served for less than six months before being replaced by Kiraitu Murungi, a move that critics have described as political rotation.
However, this change at the top has only served to highlight the more concerning issue of why the Director General remains in office.
The decision to keep David Kemei is puzzling given the serious allegations that have been leveled against him. Sources indicate that Kemei is above 60 years old, which directly violates the mandatory retirement age provisions for public servants.
Despite this clear breach of regulations, he continues to hold the position of Director General, raising questions about whether the rules apply equally to everyone.
Perhaps more troubling are the claims about how Kemei has been discharging his duties. The Competition Authority is supposed to be Kenya’s apex consumer and competition watchdog, responsible for protecting the public from cartels, price-fixing, and unscrutinized mergers that harm consumers.
Yet under Kemei’s leadership, the institution appears to have been largely inactive. Reports suggest that cartels continue to thrive, price-fixing goes unpunished, and mergers pass through without proper scrutiny.
This represents a significant failure of leadership at an institution that is meant to safeguard the interests of Kenyan consumers.
The situation becomes even more concerning when considering where Kemei’s attention has allegedly been focused. It has been claimed that he spends nearly 95 percent of his time not running the Competition Authority, but instead traversing Uasin Gishu County campaigning for the position of Governor.
It means the head of a key regulatory body is using his official position and work hours for personal political ambitions rather than performing his duties.
The institution meant to protect market competition has seemingly become a theatre of political convenience.
What makes this situation particularly difficult to understand is the contrast in how the two leaders have been treated.
The Chairman, who holds a non-executive position with no operational role, was removed from office.
Meanwhile, the Director General, who runs the institution on a daily basis, is past retirement age, and is allegedly using his position for political campaigning, has been allowed to keep his job.
This disparity suggests that accountability is not being applied consistently.
The public has every reason to question what is happening. The removal of a Chairman who had no operational role while keeping a Director General who faces serious allegations of misconduct sends a troubling message about governance in Kenya.
It suggests that some individuals are considered untouchable, protected by political connections rather than being held accountable for their actions.
This is not what Kenyans expect from their public institutions.Kenyans deserve a Competition Authority that functions effectively and protects their interests.
They deserve a Director General who is focused on breaking cartels and enforcing competition laws, not one who is campaigning for political office on government time.
They also deserve leaders who respect the law, including the regulations on retirement age.
The decision to retain David Kemei while removing his Chairman has raised legitimate questions about the integrity of the institution and the commitment of those in power to genuine accountability.
Leave feedback about this