Category: Business Daily

Kenya is at a digital crossroads. Migration from rural to urban areas, remote work, automation, and entirely new job categories are changing how Kenyans live and work. Yet this transformation cannot happen without infrastructure.

The young Kenyan with big digital ambitions but limited resources is trapped in a kind of digital poverty, connected but not fully included.

On the other end, millennials and Gen Z with more spending power demand seamless, high-quality services that enable work, play, and everything in between.

Meeting both ends of this spectrum requires value-driven, affordable, flexible plans that widen access and high-capacity networks that power Kenya’s growing digital economy.

Government efforts such as the National Digital Master Plan and Kenya Cloud Policy have given investors certainty that Kenya has what it takes to lead in Africa’s digital economy.

GSMA data further shows that mobile internet penetration in Africa is projected to reach nearly 50 percent by 2030, and Kenya is already leading steady development in mobile internet usage thanks to the combination of mobile internet and financial services.

The question lingers: what more can the country do to remain relevant in the ‘Silicon Savannah’ conversation? Infrastructure remains the bedrock of this transformation.

Data centres are the ‘digital power plants’ of the modern economy. Just as power plants keep cities running with electricity, data centres sustain businesses and daily life by storing, processing, and transmitting digital information. But how does this touch ordinary lives?

At the heart of Kenya’s future is a young, tech-savvy population that is ambitious, connected, and eager to be part of the digital revolution.

For the average Kenyan, the promise of a local data centre means cheaper, faster, and more reliable digital services. Today, much of our data is stored thousands of kilometres away, which adds cost and slows down access. Hosting data locally means your video call drops less often, your banking app loads faster, and your government eCitizen service works without frustrating delays.

For innovators, particularly young people in informal settlements, local data infrastructure means they can build and test apps at lower cost. A start-up with an idea for an e-health platform no longer has to pay expensive overseas cloud fees. This lowers the barrier for entry, giving more youth a fair shot at turning ideas into businesses.

Beyond digital access, infrastructure like data centre carries a more immediate benefit, jobs. Kenya’s unemployment rate in 2025 is forecast between 5.2 percent and 7.2 percent, but youth unemployment is far higher, around 67 percent. Data centres matter because they create both direct and ripple-effect opportunities.

From construction workers building the facilities, to highly skilled cloud engineers managing AI systems, thousands of jobs will be created.

And it does not stop there. Data centres need security firms, catering services, transport logistics, equipment suppliers, and maintenance contractors. For every direct job, estimates suggest three more will be created in supporting industries. For the ordinary Kenyan, this translates into immediate opportunities, not just abstract growth.

The 2024 Oxford Insights Government AI Readiness Index ranked Kenya 8th in Africa and 93rd globally, a clear signal that the country is already laying the groundwork for meaningful participation in the AI economy. Globally, artificial intelligence is projected to unlock $2.9 trillion by 2030, but tapping into that potential requires more than ambition and mobile penetration; it demands infrastructure.

AI thrives on speed, scale and massive volumes of data. Without local data centres, Kenyan innovators face higher costs, slower performance, and limited access to the computational power needed to compete on the world stage. A modern data centre bridges this gap. It allows AI systems to process locally relevant data securely under Kenyan law. This matters not only for startups experimenting with AI-driven solutions, but also for hospitals deploying diagnostic tools, smallholder farmers relying on predictive analytics for crops, and government agencies using AI to improve service delivery. Without a data centre, Kenya risks being only a consumer of imported AI solutions.

Of course, the road is not without potholes. Kenya faces a shortage of cloud engineers, data scientists, and specialised digital skills. Power stability, though stronger than in many neighbouring markets, must scale alongside demand. This path must also be driven by collaboration between the government, regulators, and private sector players.

These challenges are real, but they are not insurmountable. Investing in skills training, aligning county and national regulations, and reinforcing energy reliability will ensure that infrastructure delivers its full promise.

Kenya’s opportunity is clear, and so is the risk. If we fail to invest decisively, the ‘Silicon Savannah’ may remain a slogan while other African hubs overtake us.

But if policymakers, regulators, and private players move with urgency, Kenya can secure its place as East Africa’s digital anchor.

Building world-class data infrastructure is the first and most visible step. Making sure the student in Kisumu is hustling online and the fintech founder in Nairobi is scaling across Africa, both benefits are the work that follows.

Every now and then, a film shows up that leaves a mark, shaping how you see the world, maybe even who you become. For me, as a visual artist, that film was Tron: Legacy, among others.

Movies like Terminator 2, Dark City, The Matrix, 300, and of course, Tron: Legacy presented scenes that made me wonder how they were able to pull them off, even after watching the behind-the-scenes commentary.

The visuals, the colour, the sound, it wasn’t just cool, it was art in motion. Tron: Legacy came out at the perfect time for me. I was in the early days of my visual arts journey, and it’s the only movie that made me want to create cool designs. So, yes, Tron is personal. I’ve been waiting over a decade for a new one, hoping Disney would finally take the risk, build on what Legacy started, and maybe even ask deeper questions.

Instead, Tron: Ares ended up being a painful reminder that good visuals can’t save mediocre writing sprinkled with a lot of generic modern trends.

I walked into the theatre excited. I walked out deflated and, honestly, a bit sad.

Tron: Ares

Directed by Joachim Rønning, Tron: Ares stars Jared Leto, Greta Lee, Evan Peters, Jodie Turner-Smith, Hasan Minhaj, and Gillian Anderson, with Jeff Bridges returning briefly as Kevin Flynn.

On paper, it’s a very promising setup. We get programmes sent from the Grid into the real world to accomplish a mission, a great chance to explore what happens when technology crosses that line between simulation and existence. Something that was promised at the end of Tron: Legacy.

But that’s not what we get.

The story plays out like a checklist of sci-fi clichés, the kind where technology can be exploited but is potentially dangerous, humanity is at risk, but this time it’s two big corporations fighting over the tech.

We’ve learned nothing from the last 50 years of sci-fi movies. The writing is flat, the plot convoluted. The dialogue feels like filler; it’s terrible. You keep waiting for it to say or do something new, but it never does. It’s the kind of film that mistakes looking smart for being smart, almost like something written by, wait for it, AI.

And that’s the most frustrating thing about this film. Because this franchise used to be creatively daring.

The first Tron in 1982 was groundbreaking visually. Legacy in 2010 was bold, stylish, and surprisingly emotional. Ares just feels safe.

Polished, yes, but safe. Disney took a legacy IP, ran it through their modern filter, and stripped out the uniqueness and progressiveness that made Tron special.

Some positives

Here’s what I’ll give it: Ares looks and sounds incredible. The lighting, the red, blue and orange tones at night, the digital textures when programs are derezed (destroyed), it’s everything you’d expect from a Tron movie on a technical level.

There are some very impressive light-cycle chases, and the opening sequence, for a moment, captures that old magic and brings newcomers up to speed. The music by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross adds grit and mood, almost matching what Daft Punk did with Tron: Legacy.

There are flashes of something that could have been great. But they never last.

Jared Leto’s Ares is a strange choice. He’s supposed to be this program-turned-being trying to understand humanity, but he feels robotic, which contradicts what’s been set up by the franchise.

Programmes have personalities. Still, I enjoyed his performance; he was easily the most interesting character, but given very little to work with. Greta Lee brings heart where she can, and Jeff Bridges’ cameo is a nice touch, but nothing connects.

The issue is the bloated script, too much exposition, and half-baked dialogue, though it’s somewhat manageable thanks to the direction, action set pieces, pacing, and editing.

At times, it even forgets it’s a Tron movie. There’s so much that feels generic, like those terrible high-budget straight-to-streaming sci-fi films that just happen to have light cycles in it. It’s missing that pulse, that sense of wonder the franchise used to have.

Oversimplified

And maybe this is where my disappointment really comes from. Tron has always been about creation, about humans making something so advanced that it begins to mirror them. It’s about identity, curiosity, and the idea of digital life finding meaning.

Ares should’ve been the perfect sci-fi film for this generation, especially with all the conversations around AI and consciousness. Instead, it goes for the most basic Hollywood sci-fi formula we’ve seen over and over again. Basically, oversimplification killed this movie.

Another thing that stood out, and not in a good way, is how much this movie feels like it’s trying to please everyone. Disney plays it so safe that it becomes bland.

The attempts at representation feel forced, not because diversity is a problem (it’s needed), but because it’s done without any real storytelling purpose.

It feels performative, like a studio note rather than a creative choice, where the push for race and gender sits at the forefront rather than story and plot. Basically, this is hardly a Flynn story anymore; it’s just random diverse characters we’re suddenly supposed to care about.

And maybe that’s the word for this film: performative.

Every part of it feels like an imitation, the design, the dialogue, the emotion. It’s trying to remind you of Tron: Legacy without understanding why that film worked.

It’s frustrating because you can see the potential bleeding through. You can tell there was a version of this film that might’ve worked if they’d just stuck to what was set up by the second movie, one that trusted its audience. But somewhere along the line, it got watered down.

Tron without Tron

And how is this a Tron without Tron? Yes, I understand the events of Legacy, but they should have found a way to bring him back. I mean, what is the point of calling it Tron without the character?

Leaving the theatre, and even now, I couldn’t stop thinking about Legacy.

That film wasn’t perfect, but it was streamlined. It was ahead of its time both visually and thematically. It was about connection, creation, and the idea that even inside a computer, there is complex, vibrant life. Ares only touches on that, then redirects us to lesser intriguing, poorly written real-life characters.

As a Tron fan, I wanted something that built on what made me fall in love with the series in the first place: imagination, risk, sci-fi beauty that bleeds cool, and a sense of awe. But what I got was a waste of money on a ticket, and this is coming from a person who believes in visual flair over substance in film.

Go watch it

If you’ve never heard of Tron and just want a decent dose of visual spectacle and action, then yes, there’s something to enjoy here, preferably on IMAX or any cinema with great audio and a massive screen.

I still think Tron can come back. But it needs creators who understand that visuals are only half the point. The soul is what made it matter.

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has recommended a further review of tax exemptions on goods and services as it identifies a Sh1.78 trillion gap in collections of value-added tax(VAT).

An internal report from the tax authority reveals that the difference between actual and potential tax collections from VAT amounts to 11.8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) as of the end of 2023, which translates to a nominal Sh1.78 trillion.

Veteran stockbrokerage firms are exiting the Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE) after years of weak earnings, paving the way for a new crop of investors seeking to ride on technology to draw in more retail investors in a market that has gone without an initial public offering in more than a decade.

Kenya’s capital markets landscape has witnessed the buyouts of four brokerage firms in barely a year, a trend that insiders attribute largely to reduced business, rising competition and the persistent initial public offering (IPO) drought.

Every few months, we wake up to the same headlines-collapsed buildings, cracked roads, and washed-out bridges. The conversation quickly turns to who approved the project, but rarely to what lay beneath it. The truth is that many of these failures begin long before the first brick is laid-when we ignore the ground itself.

Across Kenya and much of the developing world, ground science and engineering assessment remain the most undervalued elements of infrastructure planning.

The subsurface -where soil, rock, and groundwater interact-determines whether a structure will last decades or fail after a single season. Yet, in many projects, site investigations are treated as an afterthought, rather than a foundation for design and safety. In my work as a professional engineer, geoscientist, and project management professional, I have seen how early attention to the ground transforms outcomes.

On major infrastructure projects in Canada, Asia, and East Africa, design begins with a thorough understanding of local geology. This upfront investment consistently reduces risks, shortens construction timelines, and saves enormous costs that would otherwise go into repairs and litigation.

By contrast, when ground studies are rushed or omitted, problems emerge later in the form of foundation settlement, cracking, or drainage failure.

We then blame contractors or design teams, when the real issue often lies in the systemic neglect of subsurface science. Studies show that up to 20 percent of infrastructure spending in developing regions is lost to premature failure and repair – a burden that taxpayers ultimately bear.

Three issues drive this pattern. First, ground data is undervalued- investigations rarely exceed three percent of project cost, yet they determine structural integrity.

Second, coordination is weak-engineers, planners, and geologists often work in isolation. Finally, enforcement is inconsistent, even where regulations require engineering assessments.

To change this, Kenya must place engineering geology and geotechnical insight at the centre of infrastructure policy.

That means mandating thorough ground investigations before design approval, promoting the use of modern assessment technologies, and building stronger collaboration between engineers and geoscientists. Policymakers must also recognise that the earth beneath us is a living system – it shifts, absorbs water, and responds to stress. Ignoring these realities guarantees failure.

Infrastructure is the backbone of our economy, but foundations are its heartbeat. Until we start building with the ground – not against it – we will keep rebuilding what should never have failed.

The Treasury has raised concern over the lack of integration and ownership of revenue collection systems across county governments, warning that the gaps pose data breach and revenue leakage risks.

An assessment of county public financial management contained in the Treasury’s 2025 Budget Review and Outlook Paper (BROP) notes that the majority of county governments continue to use unintegrated revenue collection platforms, many of which are operated by third-party service providers.

The dispute traces back to October 2009, when Krish Commodities Limited filed six trademark applications: Wali Basmati Rice, Rouz Basmati Rice, Pilau Basmati Rice, Nawab Basmati Rice, Rajah Basmati Rice and Al-Hannan Basmati Rice.

Each application incorporated the words ‘Basmati Rice’ but expressly disclaimed exclusivity over at least the elements ‘Basmati’ and ‘Rice.’

In 2010, the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) lodged notices of opposition before the Registrar of Trademarks.

It argued that ‘Basmati’ is a geographical indication (GI) referring to a distinctive long-grain aromatic rice cultivated in specific regions of India and Pakistan.

APEDA further contended that registration of these trademarks in Kenya would be misleading to consumers and unfairly exploit the reputation associated with Basmati rice. The Registrar of Trademarks dismissed the oppositions, finding that APEDA had failed to establish any proprietary rights in Kenya or to prove that the use of ‘Basmati’ in the composite trademarks would mislead consumers.

The High Court upheld the registrar’s decision in 2017 but went further in two important respects. First, it clarified that APEDA’s status as a statutory authority in India, charged with promoting agricultural exports, does not in itself confer proprietary or enforceable rights in Kenya.

Second, it observed that, at the time APEDA filed its opposition, ‘Basmati’ had not yet been registered as a geographical indication even in India, further weakening the agency’s claim to exclusive rights abroad. These additions provided greater legal and factual depth to the registrar’s findings and underscored the challenge of asserting cross-border GI rights without domestic recognition.

The Court of Appeal has now affirmed that outcome, maintaining that APEDA lacked a legal basis under Kenyan law to prevent registration.

The key issue for consideration was whether, under Kenyan law and Kenya’s international obligations, particularly the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), ‘Basmati’ qualifies as a geographical indication, and if so, whether its use in composite trade marks can be barred without prior domestic registration or recognition.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of both the Registrar of Trademarks and the High Court. While the court acknowledged that ‘Basmati’ may satisfy the TRIPS Agreement definition of a geographical indication, it held that determining whether ‘Basmati’ qualifies as a GI under Kenyan law was not a question to be resolved in the abstract nor for the first time on a second appeal.

The court emphasised that any recognition of ‘Basmati’ as a geographical indication in Kenya must follow the statutory pathway prescribed under Section 40A of the Trademarks Act, rather than being addressed indirectly in opposition proceedings to a trademark application.

In its analysis, the court accepted that Kenya is bound by its TRIPS obligations to provide protection for geographical indications and to refuse or invalidate misleading trademarks.

However, it reiterated that TRIPS is not self-executing in Kenya and must be implemented through national legislation. Section 40A (5) of the Trade Marks Act gives effect to these obligations by creating a framework through which geographical indications may be registered as collective or certification marks, enabling questions of scope, control, and use to be properly assessed.

Because ‘Basmati’ had not been registered or formally recognised as a GI in Kenya, APEDA lacked any legal basis to oppose Krish Commodities’ trademark applications.

The court observed that the respondent had disclaimed exclusive rights to the term ‘Basmati’, found no evidence of confusion or deception, and noted that the term had become descriptive in Kenya, commonly referring to long-grain aromatic rice, including local varieties. The court dismissed the appeal in its entirety with costs.

The judgment reinforces Kenya’s territorial approach to intellectual property rights, making it clear that foreign GIs, even those that are internationally recognised, require domestic registration or formal recognition to attract protection.

The decision cements consistent deference to Kenya’s statutory framework, which currently channels GI protection through the Trade Marks Act rather than international instruments.

The case illustrates that Kenyan courts are unlikely to interpret TRIPS directly or expansively, preferring to rely strictly on the domestic legal architecture. For brand owners and foreign producers, the judgment underscores the importance of proactive local registration strategies not only for GIs but for any form of intellectual property rights whose protection originates outside Kenya.

Notably, the Court of Appeal’s reference to the ‘Geographical Indications Act (2019)’ is a factual inaccuracy, as no such Act has been enacted. The Geographical Indications Bill, first introduced in 2019, remains pending. The only operative framework continues to be section 40A (5) of the Trade Marks Act.

GIs are a strategic tool for Kenya’s agricultural sector, offering a pathway to enhance rural development, protect local heritage, and boost export competitiveness.

GIs also promote sustainable farming practices and empower communities by linking product quality to origin, making them a powerful instrument for inclusive economic growth and international market positioning.

For policymakers, it serves as a reminder of the urgent need to enact and operationalise Kenya’s long-delayed GI legislation to align the country’s regime with international best practice and to provide greater certainty for traders and producers.

Until Kenya enacts and implements its Geographical Indications law, GI protection will remain dependent on registration under the Trade Marks Act, and the courts will not infer protection from international instruments such as TRIPS.

Will APEADA take the fight to the Supreme Court? That remains to be seen especially after the Court of Appeal stumbled over a law that is not even in force yet.

Can a contractor pursue insolvency proceedings where the debt is disputed and an arbitration clause exists? This was the central issue before the Court of Appeal in Kwale International Sugar Company Limited versus Epco Builders Limited and two others [2025] KECA 227 (KLR), a case with implications for contractors, employers and legal practitioners navigating construction disputes.

In 2012, Kwale Sugar contracted Epco Builders (Epco) to build a factory under a Sh2.22 billion engineering, procurement and construction agreement.

A dispute arose over alleged non-payment of Sh712 million. Epco issued a statutory demand and later filed an insolvency petition seeking liquidation of Kwale Sugar. Kwale Sugar applied to set aside the demand and strike out the petition, arguing that the debt was genuinely disputed; the parties were bound by an arbitration clause; and the demand was defective under the insolvency regulations.

The High Court dismissed the application. On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the outcome but clarified important legal principles at the intersection of insolvency law and construction contracts.

Kwale Sugar had cited personal bankruptcy provisions instead of the corporate insolvency rules. The court found this error non-fatal, confirming that courts will prioritise substance over form in the absence of prejudice.

The Court of Appeal criticised the High Court’s remarks that the debt was undisputed, noting that such conclusions should be reserved for full hearings or arbitration. Courts should be cautious not to prejudge contested issues during interlocutory proceedings.

While acknowledging the existence of the arbitration clause, the court held that it does not oust the jurisdiction of insolvency courts.

Insolvency proceedings are collective in nature and serve a public interest function that may override private dispute resolution arrangements.

The court held that defects in the statutory demand, such as form irregularities, will not invalidate it unless actual prejudice is demonstrated. In this case, no prejudice was shown.

For contractors, certificates are persuasive but not talismanic. Their legal effect depends on the contract’s terms, and they will not cure fundamental issues of non-compliance, missing support or unresolved set-offs. Insolvency should be reserved for clear cases of non-payment, not deployed as leverage in a live valuation dispute.

The message to debtors is equally clear: a technical objection is strongest when coupled with a coherent evidentiary record showing why the sum claimed is not presently due under the contract.

Debt disputes must be resolved on merits, not prematurely at interlocutory stages. Arbitration does not override insolvency jurisdiction, especially where the debt is not genuinely contested.

Genuine disputes on substantial grounds must be resolved through appropriate forums like arbitration or full trial. Form defects in statutory demands will not invalidate proceedings unless actual harm is proven.

The consequences are practical. For employers, an arbitration clause is valuable only if it is invoked promptly and carried on the back of documentary substance, such as engineer or architect determinations, measurement records, variation orders, defect notices, correspondence evidencing reconciliation and a credible set-off schedule.

Paying the undisputed slice protects credibility and undercuts any narrative of inability to pay, while reserving genuine disputes for the agreed dispute-resolution forum. For more on what constitutes a genuine dispute, see our previous alert here.

For project owners, contractors and funders, the case reinforces the value of disciplined paperwork: interim payment certificates (IPC) packs tied to contract mechanisms, site diaries, measurement sheets, variation order (VO) approvals, notices and reconciliations. In a payment standoff, those records, rather than the insolvency court, will decide who ultimately pays whom, and how much.

The Kwale Sugar decision reinforces the principle that insolvency proceedings must be reserved for clear cases of inability to pay and cannot be used as leverage in unsettled construction disputes.

It also clarifies the boundaries between private dispute resolution mechanisms and public insolvency processes. Where debts are genuinely disputed on substantial grounds, the appropriate forum remains the agreed dispute resolution mechanisms, not the insolvency court.

Kenya is at a pivotal juncture in shaping its future economic relationship with the United States. With the African Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa) extended by only one year and ongoing plans for a bilateral trade agreement, the country has a unique opportunity to reposition itself as a strategic and indispensable partner to the US.

This moment requires Kenya to adopt a negotiation approach that aligns with the current American trade philosophy, particularly that of Donald Trump’s transactional and ‘America First’ outlook, which emphasises clear, measurable benefits for the US economy.

This past weekend, orchid collectors and enthusiasts gathered for the much-anticipated Annual Orchid Show at the Sarit Centre.

This year’s blooms were nothing short of lush, vibrant, and bursting with colour. Shades of purple, yellow, white, and green transformed the exhibition hall into a miniature jungle.