The government has no control over the massive e-citizen system, as revealed by Auditor-General Nancy Gathungu last week. She raised concerns that this may jeopardize the system’s capacity to account for billions of shillings in transactions.
Through it, Sh350 million is typically collected every day, up from Sh50 million in the fiscal year that concluded in June 2023. Business Daily spoke with Mr. James Ayugi, the founder and CEO of Webmasters, the company that developed the e-Citizen platform, to discuss the platform’s changeover, data privacy concerns, and the identity of the person who now receives the contentious Sh50 convenience charge.
The government has been pushing for onboarding services again in the last few months; according to official statistics, over 10,000 new ones have gone live, compared to 397 in the nearly ten years since e-Citizen launched in 2014. Why had it been moving so slowly before?
One was that regularizing the contract was complicated by a judicial case. Furthermore, several policies lacked clarity. For example, the Treasury was implementing e-Citizen, the Huduma people were attempting e-Huduma, and so on.
Still, we were able to refine the system to the point where it could grow in the current manner thanks to that prolonged trial period. In 2015, this endeavor most likely would not have succeeded.
What goes into setting up such a system? What tools and what technology go into that?
The main reason we use open-source technology is to cut expenses. This technique is even employed by large sites like Facebook. But we employ a more sophisticated language that can handle tens of thousands of requests per second, or even more, if there are enough servers. This language is scalable and fault-tolerant. We define “open source” as having no encryption. The government can extend and customize it without physical checks if we grant them a licence, but they are unable to alter the underlying system.
So, what is the estimated cost of setting up all these?
Crazy, crazy numbers. If the government were to pay, it would be tens of billions of shillings. Just a simple system like the NTSA (National Transport and Safety Authority) had like five different systems, and the cost would easily run into the billions (of shillings). That means when you add other systems like company registries, the cost will be on the higher side. Therefore, it would be very expensive if we were to go through the normal route. However, with the progression that it has gone through over time, I can say it has matured organically.
You say that it would be expensive for this thing to happen, but it happened anyway. So, who bore the cost?
During the piloting period, there was a convenience fee that was passed on to users, and this was used to support the ecosystem. Currently, the same model applies, but now the dues go directly to Treasury accounts, and this is the revenue that the government uses to sustain the system as opposed to using taxpayer funds for maintenance. I know there are policies in the offing for the digitization fund and all those other things that the government is looking into just to help aggregate and tap into other sources to finance digitization efforts. However, the eCitizen is a self-sustaining project. If it were to be tax-funded, it would have been super-expensive.
Regarding the ownership of this platform, there has been debate. The government occasionally claims that it is entirely run by them, but the Auditor General has other ideas. What is the real situation now?
We promised to provide the government with intellectual property rights to the products we had produced for Kenya when we signed a handover agreement with them last year. That one is not an event; rather, it is a process.
It’s a process since knowledge needs to be shared in order to increase government personnel’s competence to do certain tasks. On the other hand, the eCitizen ecosystem is legally owned entirely by the government as a result of the arrangement we had. The technical help that we still offer on the platform is next.
Since we were the ones who started this from the beginning and have demonstrated our ability, it made sense to give us the chance.
And that’s precisely what the government accomplished; it formalized and provided us with a chance to put our proof of concept into practice. As a result, we are now a service provider with a contractual relationship with the government.
You say there is a procedure involved in the transfer. How long do you think it will take to finish the process?
It will continue because, as you realize, you are training someone in the government today, and by tomorrow, they are gone. On the other hand, our contracts under the existing paradigm are often brief, lasting one to three years.
There are two procurement options available when using any of our services: either use our services again or switch to another vendor. To ensure that the system functions, we are collaborating closely with the government, and there are explicit terms in place for the time being.
What was the format of the handover agreement? How much of the acquisition was funded by the government?
There was a sincere transfer. We wanted to be regularized, and the government wanted control over the system. It was an arrangement that we struck rather than a paid transfer because we developed it for the government in any case.
About the teething problems that we are seeing, when should we expect to see all these resolved?
e-Citizen is a multi-vendor platform. This means there are several components supporting different institutions, some using advanced technologies, some not. Integration issues might be the ones to blame, especially for these kinds of issues.
However, since there are standards that the ICT Authority aims to achieve when it comes to integration, I believe that once we perfect those standards and go through all these tests and make sure that everything is well tested before it goes live, most of these issues will be resolved.
Let us talk about the safety of the data because this is a platform that is holding masses of sensitive and critical data. What measures did you put in place to ensure safety when you were building the site?
For us, we do not have access to any data that is stored within the government departments that are supporting citizens to access these services.
Every department only has access to data that is relevant to them. Again, all the rules of data protection have been complied with by the respective organisations.
