The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) has renewed an important conversation about how public officials present government projects to the public.
Through a recent advisory, the commission warned public officers against placing their names, photographs, political symbols, or personal messages on projects funded by taxpayers.
The move has sparked debate about accountability, public trust, and the proper use of government resources.
Across the country, many public projects such as roads, schools, health facilities, water systems, and security installations have increasingly been associated with individual leaders rather than the institutions responsible for implementing them.
In some cases, project signboards prominently display the names or images of politicians and senior government officials, creating the impression that the projects were personally financed or delivered by those individuals.
The EACC argues that such practices risk turning public projects into personal publicity platforms. Government officials are entrusted with managing public resources on behalf of citizens.
Their role is to oversee the implementation of projects funded through public money, not to claim personal ownership of achievements that are the result of government budgets and taxpayer contributions.
The discussion has also brought attention to cases that have already attracted public interest. Among them is Interior Principal Secretary Raymond Omollo, whose name has appeared on several publicly funded projects.
Questions have been raised about whether such branding aligns with public service principles and whether it could be interpreted as an effort to build personal political visibility using government-funded initiatives.
Supporters of the EACC advisory say the issue is not about questioning the performance of any particular official. Instead, they argue that the focus should remain on ensuring public resources are used appropriately and that government projects are identified by the responsible institutions rather than individual office holders.
The commission’s warning also highlights a broader concern. If one public officer is allowed to brand projects with their name, others may follow the same path. Over time, government-funded infrastructure could increasingly become a tool for personal promotion rather than a symbol of public service.
Such a trend could weaken public confidence in government institutions and blur the distinction between serving citizens and advancing personal political interests.
While many have welcomed the advisory, some observers believe that guidelines alone may not be enough.
They argue that meaningful change will depend on consistent enforcement and a willingness to review cases where concerns have already been raised. Clear action, they say, would help establish standards for all public officers regardless of their position or influence.
At the heart of the debate is a simple principle: public projects belong to the people of Kenya. They are funded through taxes collected from citizens and are intended to benefit communities without regard to politics or personalities.
Ensuring that these projects remain public assets rather than personal branding tools is essential for maintaining trust in government institutions and protecting the integrity of public service.
