A single source of truth – Can the Huduma Namba succeed as an integrated identity management system in Kenya?

The recent announcement by the Kenyan government that the full Huduma Namba or NIIMS scheme will be rolled out across the country has met with much criticism from the public, from economists, academics, lawyers and human rights groups.

But what is the Huduma Namba? And why has it caused so much controversy?

 

A new number for an improved legal identity

The Kenyan government launched the National Integrated Identity Management System (NIIMS) Pilot Programme across 15 counties in February 2019.  The full roll-out starts in March 2019 ¹.

NIIMS will capture each person’s nationality, place of birth, marital status, education background, employment status, disability, agricultural activities, and biometrics.  Births and deaths will be registered through the NIIMS programme.  The registration of citizens and residents of Kenya will result in the issue of a unique identifier, the Huduma Namba, for each individual ².

The NIIMS programme was established by the 2018 Amendment to the Registration of Persons Act, section 9A.  However, the amendment does not appear to have received adequate parliamentary scrutiny.  Nor did it benefit from levels of public participation commensurate with the importance and impact of the programme for millions of individuals.

 

Who needs a Huduma Namba?

Every citizen and resident of Kenya above the age of six is required to take part in the registration process, including foreign nationals. Every participant is expected to be physically present at the point of registration.  Third-party delegation will not be permitted.  To take part and to complete the registration process a number of documents proving the individual’s identity are needed.  Those include a birth certificate, an ID card, a driving licence, or the Kenya Revenue Authority PIN.

To ensure access to registration for as many people as possible, the process will take place at mobile registration centres, in homes and in institutions such as prisons, hospitals, learning and education establishments.  The government’s intention is that after the 30-day registration process, a 3-month data cleansing exercise will be carried out, followed by a month-long data harmonisation process.

 

Benefits

The benefits of having the Huduma Namba are said to include access to government services, a coordinated registration of people, a registration list that will avoid duplications and reduce costs and which will help with the detection and prevention of fraud, identity theft and other crimes ³.

The intention is that the Huduma Namba will provide integrated, real-time information about the number holder to a range of public agencies such as the Lands Registry, the National Social Security Fund, law enforcement agencies, the National Hospital Insurance Fund, the Kenyan Revenue Authority, the Electoral Commission and even universities ⁴.

 

Problems and criticisms

The original government plan was to upgrade the ID system from biographic to biometric ⁵, linking ID numbers to biometrics rather than to individuals’ names.  But the intent behind the system has changed so much that, with the amendment to the Registration of Persons Act, it has in effect become a parallel system.

Many have queried the need for a parallel system such as the Huduma Namba.  Kenyans already have many other identity documents and unique number identifies to prove their legal identity.  Those include an ID number, a passport number, a Kenyan Revenue Authority number, a driver’s licence number and a National Social Security Fund number.

As well as duplicating information already held by the Kenyan authorities, concerns are raised about the potential denial of access to government services for those who do not hold a Huduma Namba at the end of the registration process.  Kenyan economist David Ndii, amongst others, has argued that:

“There is no such thing as government services. They are public services and constitutional entitlements with or without Huduma Namba. We pay you to provide them.” ⁶

 

A better engagement strategy needed?

Public participation might have created more support for the programme, or at least less anxiety towards it.  It certainly would have helped Kenyans have a better understanding of what is involved in the process of gathering this information and what information will be collected.

For example, it is not clear whether DNA data will be collected.  It was anticipated that it would be part of the biometric data stored but the Kenyan government has denied this and has said that only external personality-identifying information will be collected ⁷.

 

How secure is the data?

Another source of anxiety for many is management and access to the data and whether it will be handled securely.  The lack of data protection laws in Kenya are the main concern behind how and how well this data will be handled.  Without legal provisions for the storage and use of the data, unauthorised access and data leakage can mean that the data is released or sold to entities other than the government agencies that need it.  Once the data is no longer securely held, there is no way of controlling who uses and ensuring it will be used for the purpose for which it was collected.

The Kenyan Human Rights Commission (KHRC) has brought a challenge to the roll-out of the programme on the basis that the law only empowers the state to collect the data, but does not make provisions for the secure handling of that data ⁸.  In any event, KHRC argues, there is already a system in place, the Integrated Population Registration System, which works.

 

Huduma Namba to marginalise further Kenya’s minority groups

A major concern is that, as well as limiting public services to only those who register successfully for the Huduma Namba, evidence of citizenship will be tied to the new system.  The challenges of providing conclusive proof of citizenship has affected a number of Kenyan communities including the Somali-Kenyans, the Nubian Community of Kenya and the Makonde and Shona Communities.

I have written in an earlier blog about the Somali-Kenyan and Nubian communities’ fight for recognition and acceptance.  To focus on the Namibian Community as an example, members of the Nubian community originate from descendants of Sudanese Nubians brought over a 100 years ago by British Colonial forces.  As many as 13% of Nubian adults in Kenya are currently stateless.  Among minors, 37% have no documentation at all, and only 2% hold firm proof of Kenyan nationality in the form of a passport (national ID cards can only be obtained at majority).  They must go through a long and humiliating process to obtain recognition as citizens and be registered for an ID card.

Many in the Nubian and other minority communities in Kenya will once again be unable to complete the process.  The already limited access to public services available to Kenyan citizens will be restricted further.  Failure to obtain a Huduma Namba will be another step back in their fight to be counted.

 

Challenging the Huduma Namba to challenge further marginalisation

Given these hurdles to recognition, it is not surprising that alongside the challenge by KHRC, the Nubian Rights Forum has also challenged the new scheme ⁹.  A lawyer for Nubian Rights Forum has expressed concern that previous schemes have resulted in the exclusion of members of the Nubian Community of Kenya, and that the NIIMS systems will create further barriers to inclusion.

“Since the sued parties have neglected to address the issues looked under the less complex enlistment framework, presenting the more mind-boggling one will leave individuals from minimized zones powerless to finish enrolment, rendering them helpless to profit by any open administrations.” ¹⁰

 

Is resistance futile?

Leading academics, lawyers and economists have called for citizens and residents to boycott the registration process in protest.  It is not clear how many people will refuse to go through the registration process in light of the concerns raised and what the impact will be for those who refuse.  Will all those who fail to register really be denied access to public services, even if they can prove their legal identity in other ways?  Or is that a tactic to ensure that people are motivated to register?

The two court cases still to be heard seem the best way to challenge short-comings with the new scheme or to stop it being rolled out altogether.  It is not clear yet when a decision will be made on those challenges.

At the moment at least, there is no single source of truth on the impact of this initiative.