The Senate Standing Committee on Information, Communication and Technology today held a meeting with the Chief Executive Officer of the Anti-Counterfeit Authority (ACA), Dr Robi M. King’a, to deliberate on the use of digital technologies and product traceability systems in combating counterfeit and illicit alcohol and protecting consumers in Kenya.

The Committee was informed that the challenge of illicit alcohol extends beyond counterfeit products to include tax-leaked, smuggled, substandard, adulterated, unlicensed artisanal and surrogate alcohol, requiring a coordinated multi-agency response.

The Authority noted that counterfeit alcohol constitutes a narrower component of the wider illicit-alcohol problem and may involve the unlawful use of protected brands, labels, caps, seals, bottles and other packaging, as well as the refilling of genuine branded bottles with illicit contents.

Dr King’a told the Committee that available evidence points to a predominantly domestic illicit-alcohol problem, with locally manufactured products accounting for the larger share of seized alcohol. He noted that ACA-cited seizure data indicated that 77 per cent of seized alcohol was locally manufactured, 15 per cent imported and eight per cent of unknown origin, although the Authority cautioned that the figures should not be treated as a nationally representative market share without the underlying methodology and cut-off date.

The meeting further heard that the Anti-Counterfeit Integrated Management System (AIMS), the Authority’s digital platform, supports intellectual-property recordation, import-related declarations and internal regulatory functions, but its statutory recordation and security-device framework is currently centred on imported goods.

According to the Authority, the existing system does not comprehensively capture locally manufactured finished alcohol, local bottling, contract manufacturing, refilling, packaging suppliers and domestic distribution. AIMS also does not independently verify excise payment, chemical safety, standards compliance, premises licensing or lawful ethanol use.

The Authority proposed the phased rollout of an anti-counterfeit security device for high-risk products, including alcoholic beverages, with each product assigned a unique identifier linked to a secure ACA-controlled record. The system would enable consumers and enforcement agencies to verify the authenticity of products while generating data that could support detection of suspicious activity.

The Authority emphasised that the proposed security device should complement rather than duplicate existing regulatory marks, including KRA excise stamps and KEBS certification marks. Under the proposed interoperable model, ACA would verify product and brand authenticity, KRA would confirm excise status, KEBS would verify standards and certification status, while county governments would provide licensing information.

The Committee was informed that legislative amendments would be necessary to extend the current security-device framework to prescribed locally manufactured goods. The proposed amendments would also provide for registration of local manufacturers, authorised bottlers and contract manufacturers, while establishing safeguards against cloning, tampering and unauthorised reuse of security devices.

The Authority further proposed a national technology architecture linking authentication, tax and customs, standards and safety, licensing, supply-chain events, consumer verification and enforcement data. The architecture would allow agencies to exchange information through secure interfaces while retaining their respective legal mandates and responsibilities.

The meeting heard that counterfeiters are increasingly employing sophisticated methods to defeat authentication systems, including cloning genuine QR codes, reusing genuine bottles and labels, substituting contents, manipulating digital accounts, replaying valid serial numbers and selling illicit products through social media and closed messaging platforms.

To address these threats, ACA proposed the use of secure identifiers, tamper-evident packaging, scan analytics, batch validation, anomaly detection, cybersecurity measures, physical inspections and laboratory testing. The Authority stressed that a QR code on its own cannot guarantee the authenticity or safety of an alcoholic product.

The Authority recommended that the Senate support a legislative and interoperable national authentication framework covering both imported and locally manufactured high-risk alcoholic products, while ensuring that the digital framework forms part of a broader multi-agency strategy to address illicit alcohol.

It further proposed a time-bound pilot targeting selected high-risk imported and locally manufactured alcoholic products before nationwide rollout. The pilot would assess security, consumer usability, interoperability, cost, enforcement outcomes and industry compliance before the system is scaled up.

The Authority also called for stronger coordination among agencies including ACA, the Kenya Revenue Authority, Kenya Bureau of Standards, NACADA, Government Chemist, the National Police Service, Directorate of Criminal Investigations, National Intelligence Service, county governments and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The proposed measures include establishing secure system-to-system interfaces, common data standards, improved traceability of ethanol and high-risk packaging, stronger digital evidence and chain-of-custody procedures, enhanced cybersecurity capacity and specialised personnel to support digital investigations and enforcement.

The Authority told the Committee that successful implementation would require a phased approach, beginning with the development of common definitions and data standards, preparation of legislative amendments and selection of pilot products, followed by development and testing of the authentication system before expansion to additional product categories and agencies.

The engagement comes amid growing concern over the proliferation of illicit alcohol and the need to strengthen consumer protection through technology, effective enforcement and coordinated government action.