New Bill Seeks Mandatory Retirement at 60 and Fixed Terms for Kenya’s Top Police Chiefs.

A controversial amendment to Kenya’s National Police Service Act, introduced in Parliament today, seeks to impose a strict 60-year age cap and fixed five-year term limits for the nation’s apex policing posts. If passed, the Bill will overhaul the leadership structure of the National Police Service (NPS), affecting the current and future occupants of the offices of Inspector-General (IG), Deputy Inspector-Generals (DIGs), and the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI).

What the Bill Proposes

• Age Limit of 60 Years: No individual aged 60 or above would be eligible for appointment as IG or DIG. It also applies to any candidate in these offices at the time of appointment.
• Fixed Term for DIGs: DIGs will serve a single, non-renewable five-year term.
• Legal Clarifications and Deletions: The Bill proposes deleting the current section governing appointment of DIGs, replacing it with updated requirements that include the proposed age and term limits. It also amends sections of the Act to align with the new structure.
• Goal of Amendments: Supporters argue the changes are needed to promote orderly succession, reduce uncertainties in promotions, and ensure fitness in leadership given the demanding nature of top police command.

Who Introduced the Bill

Teso North MP Oku Kaunya is the sponsoring MP behind the National Police Service (Amendment) Bill, 2025. The proposal is being reviewed by the National Assembly’s Committee on Administration and Internal Security.

Why This Is Explosive

• Current law has no age cap: There is presently no mandatory retirement age for the IG or DIG in Kenya’s National Police Service. The absence of an upper age limit has long raised concerns over leadership effectiveness and continuity.
• Potentially forces early exits: Individuals currently serving in those roles who are past 60 or close to it may be disqualified under the proposed law. That means possible abrupt leadership changes within NPS.
• Risk of political and institutional backlash: Such sweeping reforms often breed tension — among serving officers, within political circles, and possibly from past leaders who see the measure as punitive or disruptive.
• Precedents and alignment concerns: Questions will arise about parity with other public service roles, consistency in enforcing the retirement age, and whether similar reforms will be applied in other security organs.

What to Watch

1. Committee Review: Whether the Administration and Internal Security Committee pushes the Bill forward or demands amendments—especially from security stakeholders.
2. Impact on Sitting IG/DIG Officers: Leaders already in office may face legal, bureaucratic or reputational consequences depending on how the Bill addresses transitional provisions.
3. Public and Police Service Reaction: Strong reactions likely from police unions, veteran officers, and civil society—who may demand consultations or challenge the Bill in court.
4. Timeline to Enactment or Rejection: Speed of debate, amendments, and voting in Parliament will determine whether the changes happen before 2027.
5. Effect on Stability and Security: Any leadership vacuum or abrupt changes can influence morale, command structure efficiency, and public confidence in policing.