Traditional and alternative medical practitioners who fail to adhere to regulations set by the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) are likely to face a fine not exceeding KSh 3 million or a 3-year imprisonment, according to a proposed bill.
- •This comes as the government moves to formalize and regulate indigenous remedies and community-based healing, through the The Kenya Medical Research Institute Bill, 2025, presented in the National Assembly by Seme MP James Nyikal (ODM).
- •The bill empowers the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) to evaluate the quality, safety, and efficacy of all traditional and alternative medicines in the country.
- •Remedies deemed unsafe, ineffective, or unsanitary could be removed from the market, while those meeting scientific standards would require certification before public use.
“The institute shall employ a variety of scientific methodologies including biochemical, pharmacological, and toxicological evaluations and conduct pre-clinical and clinical trials to assess the safety and efficacy of traditional and alternative medical products,” the bill states.
Under the proposed law, several practices common in informal herbal trade could become criminal offenses. These include adulterating herbal remedies with pharmaceutical drugs and making unsubstantiated health claims. The bill also envisions a regulatory structure where uncertified healers risk being pushed out of the market if their remedies do not pass formal evaluation.
Why It Matters
The bill has been forwarded as a step toward modernizing the health sector and protecting the public from unsafe or fraudulent treatments. By bringing traditional medicine into a regulated framework, the government aims to create pathways for scientific validation, commercialization, and innovation into formal healthcare.
The approach reflects global trends where indigenous knowledge is being systematically leveraged for pharmaceutical development. As diseases evolve, firms across the world are exploring wider possibilities in cheap and accessible herbal remedies that could produce less side effects.
Generations of healers and traditional medical practitioners have operated autonomously, relying on inherited knowledge and local trust networks. The Centralization of oversight under KEMRI effectively transfers control of this knowledge to a government research institution, opening the door to standardized licensing and potential intellectual property disputes.
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
The proposed framework does not detail benefit-sharing arrangements if community remedies lead to commercially viable drugs. Critics of similar policies elsewhere in Africa have warned of biopiracy, where state or private actors profit from traditional knowledge without returning value to its original custodians.
The proposed legislation will also vest ownership of all inventions developed by its employees and associates in the institute, while also authorizing the creation of national biobanks to collect, store, and manage human tissues, blood, and genetic material.
Any invention produced within KEMRI’s ecosystem would belong to the institute by default, unless a prior agreement states otherwise. Researchers remain the recognized inventors but are not the legal owners of their creations. KEMRI would handle patent applications under the Industrial Property Act, retain the right to commercialize resulting innovations, and distribute financial benefits according to its internal policies.
The presentation of the bill comes after a fight over a homegrown anti-venom between local innovators and KEMRI. Three Machakos researchers allege in a Senate petition that the state researcher blocked their patent, demanded illicit payments, and pursued rival projects after they disclosed the formula for a traditional, non-animal plasma treatment.
This conflict reveals that while centralising research, regulation, and intellectual property in one agency may promise efficiency, it risks stifling innovation, discouraging indigenous knowledge-sharing, and creating conflicts of interest where the regulator is also the competitor. Nevertheless, KEMRI is also a government agency that is prone to bureaucratic risks that could clash with innovators’ interests.
