By Benadeta Mwaura - Reporter
Kenya, December 10 2025 - A new continent-wide study by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and the African Digital Rights Network (ADRN) is sounding the alarm over biometric digital-ID systems across Africa, warning that poorly designed national ID programmes are already locking millions of people out of essential services, from healthcare and education to voting rights.
The findings land at a sensitive moment for Kenya, where government agencies are preparing a refreshed digital-ID framework after years of controversy over Huduma Number and concerns around data protection, access and surveillance. The IDS report, Biometric Digital-ID in Africa: Progress and Challenges to Date, examines systems in ten countries, from Botswana to Ethiopia, Senegal, Liberia, DR-Congo and Tunisia, and paints a troubling picture of how digital identity can reinforce, rather than reduce, exclusion.
“Rights are becoming conditional on biometric ID” Tony Roberts, co-editor of the report and Research Fellow at IDS, warned that basic rights are becoming contingent on digital enrollment. “Worryingly, fundamental human rights, like education, healthcare and the right to vote are rapidly becoming conditional on enrolment in biometric digital-ID systems,” Roberts says in the report.
He adds that the very people who need public services most are often the ones unable to register: “It is locking out millions of citizens who cannot enrol in biometric digital-ID systems, particularly those with disabilities.” Gbenga Sesan, Executive Director of Paradigm Initiative and co-editor, says citizens’ resistance is not ignorance, but grounded in experience.
“Many citizens do not want to enrol for a biometric digital-ID because they have good reason not to trust their governments with their biometrics and personal information,” Sesan notes. The report highlights multiple African cases where biometric databases were breached, mismanaged, or allegedly used to track critics, opposition figures and activists, heightening fears over surveillance.
The roll-out of biometric-ID infrastructure across the continent has already cost over US$1 billion, according to the report. This includes equipment, data systems, outsourced tech contracts, and recurrent administrative costs, often funded through loans or donor support.
Yet despite the investment, the systems are far from inclusive. The report identifies several groups consistently excluded:
1. Persons with disabilities
2. Rural populations without electricity or internet
3. Women in low-income households
4. Citizens lacking birth certificates or legacy IDs
5. People in conflict-affected or displaced communities
More from Kenya
For these groups, traveling long distances to registration centres, providing multiple documents, or navigating digital equirements is prohibitive. Kenya is not one of the ten countries studied, but the warnings echo loudly in Nairobi. The country has struggled with digital-ID rollouts before. Huduma Namba faced court challenges over privacy risks, weak data-protection safeguards, and failure to conduct a full data-impact assessment.
The government has since proposed new frameworks, including Maisha Namba, under a revised Data Protection Act. The IDS findings raise urgent questions for Kenya as it plans its next phase of digital-ID rollout. Key concerns include whether the system will be accessible to people without smartphones, internet access, or existing documentation, and whether sufficient legal safeguards exist to prevent misuse of biometric data.
There are also pressing social implications. How will the government prevent disenfranchisement of vulnerable groups, such as pastoral communities, persons with disabilities, and border populations? And is there a risk that essential services, including voting, NHIF/SHA, NSSF, or education, could become conditional on digital enrollment, mirroring the exclusion patterns seen elsewhere in Africa? The IDS and ADRN call for rights-first, not tech-first, approaches.
Their recommendations emphasize a rights-first approach to digital identity systems. The report urges governments to design ID programmes with communities, ensuring participation from the very people who will use them, rather than imposing systems from the top down.
They also call for strong data-protection laws and independent oversight bodies to safeguard citizens’ personal information. Without clear legal frameworks and accountable regulators, biometric data can be mishandled, exposed, or misused. Another key recommendation is the need for accessible remedies when citizens face exclusion, errors, or breaches. Whether it is a misspelled name, unmatched biometrics, or a corrupted record, people must have a clear and fair path to correct mistakes and reclaim access to services.
The report warns against the growing trend of making essential rights dependent on a single digital identifier, noting that doing so risks cutting off millions who cannot enroll due to documentation gaps, disability, distance, or technology barriers. Finally, the authors stress the importance of robust safeguards against surveillance and political misuse. With biometric systems capable of tracking movement and identity, strong protections are needed to ensure that digital ID does not become a tool for targeting critics, activists, or opposition voices.
Digital identity is rapidly becoming the backbone of modern state services. When well- designed, these systems can reduce fraud, streamline service delivery, and help reach the unbanked. But the IDS report shows that without inclusion, legal protections, transparency and accountability, digital-ID systems can morph into tools of exclusion, deepening inequalities and shutting people out of life-essential rights.
As Kenya moves ahead with its next phase of digital-ID development, the findings offer a timely warning: technology alone does not build trust or guarantee rights. Good governance does.
