By Dennis Gichuiri
Nine professional bodies accuse government of sidelining key stakeholders and young practitioners in drafting the Architectural and Quantity Surveying Practitioners Bill, 2026.
Nine professional bodies in Kenya’s built environment sector have called on the government to suspend further progress on the Architectural and Quantity Surveying Practitioners Bill, 2026, citing concerns over inadequate public participation and the exclusion of key stakeholders.
In a joint statement issued in Nairobi on Friday, October 16, 2026, the organisations said the proposed legislation had been developed and published without giving the wider professional community a fair opportunity to contribute.
The bodies, which include architects, engineers, construction managers, interior designers, planners, surveyors, lawyers, engineering technologists and contractors, want the government to convene an inclusive consultation process before proceeding with the Bill.
They maintained that they support reforms aimed at improving professional standards, protecting the public and strengthening regulation but opposed what they described as a closed process involving only selected stakeholders.
“What we cannot accept is legislation of this magnitude being shaped behind closed doors, by a select few, on behalf of the many,” the organisations said.
The statement was signed on behalf of the Architects Alliance (TAA), Institute of Engineers of Kenya (IEK), Interior Designers Association of Kenya (IDAK), Association of Construction Managers of Kenya (ACMK), Town and County Planners Association of Kenya, Institution of Surveyors of Kenya (ISK), Law Society of Kenya (LSK), Institution of Engineering Technology of Kenya (IET-K) and Kenya Federation of Master Builders (KFMB).
Professionals Raise Concerns Over Consultation Process
The organisations accused the government of engaging selectively with individual stakeholders considered supportive of the Bill while leaving out other professional associations representing thousands of practitioners.
They argued that the approach fell short of meaningful public participation as required under Articles 10 and 118 of the Constitution of Kenya.
The groups also questioned the transparency of the consultation process, saying the criteria used to select participants and records of submissions made had not been made public.
They warned that legislation targeting architecture and quantity surveying could have far-reaching implications for other professions across the construction and infrastructure sector.
According to the associations, the proposed law touches on the work of engineers, construction managers, interior designers, planners, surveyors, contractors and developers.
They cautioned that regulating architecture and quantity surveying in isolation could create overlapping mandates, regulatory gaps and conflicts between professional bodies.
The organisations further argued that laws governing the design, costing and certification of buildings directly affect public safety and therefore require broad scrutiny before enactment.
They said legislation developed without the participation of those expected to implement it risked losing legitimacy among the professionals it seeks to regulate.
Young Professionals Demand Representation
The nine organisations also raised concern over what they described as the absence of young professionals from the process.
They said graduates, interns, students and emerging practitioners would be among those most affected by the proposed law, particularly its provisions on registration, licensing, internships, fees and entry into professional practice.
The groups called for young professionals to be given a formal role in any renewed consultations, arguing that their experiences were essential in shaping a fair and practical regulatory framework.
They proposed structured engagement through professional associations, student chapters and university schools of the built environment.
The organisations said young practitioners needed an opportunity to raise concerns about access to the professions, mentorship, the cost of registration and the challenges faced by those beginning their careers.
They warned that developing a law governing entry into professional practice without listening to those seeking to enter the sector would leave important gaps in the final framework.
Five Demands to Government
The professional bodies outlined five demands, beginning with an immediate pause on all further progress on the Bill pending inclusive consultations.
They want the government to convene an all-stakeholder forum bringing together professional associations, regulators, academic institutions, industry players and members of the public.
The groups also want young professionals and students recognised as a distinct constituency with representation in both the consultation forum and any committee tasked with drafting the legislation.
They further called for the publication of a clear consultation framework setting out timelines, the full draft Bill and a public record of all submissions received.
The final demand is for a harmonised approach to regulating the built environment to ensure that reforms affecting one profession strengthen the wider sector rather than create divisions or conflicting regulatory requirements.
Groups Offer to Engage Government
Despite their objections, the organisations said they remained willing to work with the government to develop legislation that is fair, effective and widely accepted by professionals.
They said a transparent process involving all affected parties would produce a stronger law that would be easier to implement and command greater respect across the industry.
The associations maintained that reform should not be abandoned but should be pursued through a process that recognises the contribution of all professions involved in designing, constructing, managing and maintaining Kenya’s built environment.
“Kenya’s built environment belongs to all of us. So must the laws that govern it,” the statement concluded.
The statement did not provide a response from the government or the sponsors of the Bill to the concerns raised by the professional bodies.
It also did not specify the next legislative steps or indicate whether the government would agree to suspend the Bill pending further consultations.
