Fresh Complaint to EACC Rekindles Long-Standing Questions Over Fazul Mahamed’s Academic Credentials

A new complaint filed with the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) on 27 November 2025 has reopened a long-running public debate around the academic history, eligibility for office, and accountability of former NGO Coordination Board boss and former Private Security Regulatory Authority (PSRA) Director-General Fazul Mahamed.

In the letter, citizen Haggai Odiawo urges the anti-graft agency to explain why, despite earlier investigative findings and persistent public concerns, Fazul has allegedly continued to access state benefits tied to offices he previously held. Further, based on publicly available salary structures, Mr Fazul earned approximately KSh. 56,240,000 in cumulative salaries and allowances while serving as the CEO of the NGO Co-ordination Board and the Director General of the Private Security Regulatory Authority (PSRA). Odiawo wants Fazul to refund these monies.

Odiawo’s petition is not the first to raise concerns, but it appears to be the sharpest yet, and it arrives at a moment when Kenyans are increasingly demanding transparency from public institutions. Odiawo claims that the public deserves clarity on long-standing questions about the academic qualifications presented by Fazul during his appointments to senior public regulatory roles. He further states that, based on publicly available reports, Fazul may have been registered at Egerton University under the name “Mahamed Yusuf” and that he was allegedly discontinued in his third year. Odiawo argues that if these publicly circulated claims are accurate, they raise legitimate questions about whether he met the qualifications required for the positions he held and whether the public should recover any benefits linked to those appointments.

None of Odiawo’s assertions, however, translates into findings of wrongdoing. To date, no court has issued a conviction relating to Fazul’s academic records, and he has publicly maintained his right to hold office. Yet, the existence of official inquiries in the past makes the issue difficult to ignore.

The new petition references previous investigations conducted by oversight bodies, including the Commission on Administrative Justice (CAJ) and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission itself, which, according to their own public reports, raised concerns about inconsistencies in the academic documentation provided at the time of Fazul’s appointment to the NGO Coordination Board in 2014.

In its 2016 report, CAJ stated that it was unable to authenticate the degree certificate said to have been used in the appointment process, and recommended administrative action. EACC, also examining the matter at the time, indicated similar difficulties in tracing the certificate. These reports did not amount to criminal culpability but formed the basis of a long-running public conversation about transparency in appointments to public office.

Despite this history, Fazul went on to serve as the Director-General of the Private Security Regulatory Authority, where he became a prominent and often polarising reformist voice. He drove major regulatory changes and attracted both praise and criticism from across the security sector. His tenure ended in 2024, but Odiawo’s letter argues that unresolved questions from earlier years continue to cast a shadow over his time in public service.

The heart of Odiawo’s complaint is not simply whether Fazul possesses a particular academic certificate, but whether public institutions follow through when questions arise about senior appointments. The citizens’ petition challenges EACC to provide a definitive public position: Was action taken on the earlier findings? Were the concerns ever formally closed? And if so, on what basis?

Odiawo further urges the commission to consider whether any state benefits linked to the questioned appointments should be reviewed, not on the presumption of guilt, but on the principle of good governance and accountability. His letter reflects a broader sentiment among citizens who believe that unanswered questions erode public trust in regulatory bodies.

At its core, the issue is now bigger than one individual: it is a test of Kenya’s institutional integrity. The petition forces the EACC, once again, to confront a file that refuses to disappear and to deliver the clarity that many Kenyans feel has been missing for nearly a decade.

Whether the commission will reopen the investigation, issue a statement, or decline action remains to be seen. But as Odiawo’s letter demonstrates, the public appetite for transparency is not fading, and oversight bodies may finally need to confront the lingering questions head-on.