- Saboti MP Caleb Amisi has questioned cybersecurity charges he claims were imposed on government institutions following the hacking of President William Ruto’s official website.
- Amisi alleges that agencies were asked to pay millions of shillings for government domain and email security services.
- The lawmaker wants the government to explain how the charges were calculated and whether the procurement process followed the law.
- He has also questioned claims that the Communications Authority of Kenya would retain only a portion of the money while the rest goes to a private entity.
- Amisi said stronger cybersecurity is necessary but insisted that public institutions must be protected from unexplained or excessive expenditure.
Saboti MP Caleb Amisi has raised questions over what he claims could be a Sh1.89 billion government expenditure linked to cybersecurity services following the hacking of President William Ruto’s official website.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, September 1, the lawmaker alleged that the cyberattack and similar incidents involving government websites were followed by demands for large payments from public institutions. He claimed government agencies operating websites were instructed to pay millions of shillings for security and maintenance services. Amisi argued that the figures being demanded were far above what he believes such services should ordinarily cost.
Amisi claimed that government institutions had been directed to pay about Sh4.7 million each for the maintenance of government domains and email security. He argued that the cumulative amount could exceed Sh1.89 billion if the charge was applied across the affected institutions.
The Saboti MP described the alleged expenditure as a misuse of public funds and called for an explanation of how the figure was arrived at. He questioned what specific services were included in the charge and whether the government had obtained comparable prices from other providers. Amisi also asked whether the procurement process complied with the requirements of public procurement law.
He further compared the alleged government charges with the cost of ordinary Kenyan domains, arguing that standard .ke domains can be registered and maintained for significantly less. However, the actual cost of specialised government cybersecurity services can include more than domain registration alone, making a direct comparison dependent on the services covered by the disputed charge.
Amisi said the government should disclose the basis for the payment and provide information on the parties involved in delivering the services. He wants officials to explain who set the price, what work the money would cover and whether alternative service providers were considered.
The lawmaker also questioned the flow of the funds after alleging that payments were being remitted through the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA). According to Amisi, he had received information suggesting that the authority would retain only 15 percent of the money, with the remainder allegedly going to a private company.
Amisi questioned how that private entity was selected and whether it won the contract through a competitive procurement process. His remarks amount to allegations that would require documentary evidence and an official response from the relevant government agencies to establish their accuracy.
The Saboti MP also questioned whether the proposed cybersecurity expenditure should be prioritised at a time when some public institutions are facing financial difficulties. He specifically pointed to universities, which he said were struggling with payments to employees and suppliers as well as the maintenance of their facilities.
Amisi acknowledged that protecting government websites and digital systems is necessary, particularly as cyber threats continue to affect public and private institutions. He argued, however, that cybersecurity measures should be implemented transparently and at reasonable cost.
His concern is therefore not limited to the need for digital protection but also extends to how public money is spent in securing government systems. He called for accountability around the alleged charges before institutions commit funds to the programme.
The questions come after President Ruto’s official website was targeted by hackers who gained access to the platform and removed its content. The attackers reportedly demanded payment in Bitcoin after taking control of the website.
The government confirmed that the website had been compromised before restoring it within a few hours. The incident highlighted concerns over the security of government digital platforms and the potential impact of cyberattacks on official online services.
Amisi has now linked the incident to what he alleges was a subsequent push for wider cybersecurity spending across government institutions. The claims have not, however, established that the alleged Sh1.89 billion expenditure was directly caused by the website attack or that any public funds were actually lost.
Amisi wants the government to provide a detailed account of the proposed cybersecurity charges and the arrangements behind them. Among the issues he has raised are the services covered, their market value, the procurement process and the identity of any private company involved.
The allegations also raise broader questions about how government agencies secure their websites and digital infrastructure while balancing cybersecurity needs with financial accountability. Any determination on whether the charges were excessive or irregular would require examination of the relevant contracts, procurement records and technical services.
For now, Amisi’s claims remain allegations, and an official explanation from the government and the Communications Authority of Kenya would be necessary to clarify the figures and payment arrangements he has questioned.
