Films Stage Plays Amendment Bill 2026: KFCB Pushes Back On Merger Proposals, Statutory Independence Demands

Entertainment
Festus Chuma
October 3, 2026
0

The future of Kenya’s film regulator has moved into a significant legislative contest after the Kenya Film Classification Board (KFCB) rejected proposals seeking to dissolve the institution under the Films and Stage Plays (Amendment) Bill, 2026.

KFCB Acting Chief Executive Officer Nelly Oluoch appeared before the National Assembly Departmental Committee on Sports and Culture on August 4, 2026, during stakeholder discussions on the proposed legislation. The Board told lawmakers that dissolving the institution would not resolve the regulatory or operational challenges affecting Kenya’s creative sector.

The Bill, sponsored by National Assembly Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah, is National Assembly Bill No. 32 of 2026. Its principal objective is to amend the Films and Stage Plays Act, Cap. 222, by dissolving KFCB and transferring functions currently exercised by the Board to the relevant Ministry.

PAY ATTENTION: Follow Kenya Frontline WhatsApp channel for more news

That makes the debate broader than an institutional restructuring exercise.

At its centre is a question about who should regulate films, television content, stage productions and related audiovisual material in Kenya, how that authority should be exercised, plus what safeguards should remain around children, vulnerable audiences, licensing and content classification.

Films Stage Plays Amendment Bill 2026 explained

The Films Stage Plays Amendment Bill 2026 proposes the repeal of Sections 11, 11A, 11B, 11C and 11D of the Films and Stage Plays Act.

Those provisions establish KFCB, provide for its membership, define aspects of its governance and establish the position of its Chief Executive Officer.

If Parliament passes the Bill in its current form, KFCB would cease to operate as a statutory Board. Its regulatory functions would instead be exercised by the Cabinet Secretary or licensing officers designated within the Ministry.

The Bill also provides for the transfer of KFCB’s assets, liabilities, obligations and other institutional responsibilities as part of the transition.

Existing employees would be redeployed within the public service, while existing approvals, licences, contracts and legal matters would have to be accommodated within the new administrative structure.

The proposed changes form part of a wider government approach to restructuring State corporations.

The Bill’s stated rationale includes addressing operational and financial inefficiencies, improving service delivery and reducing dependence on the national Exchequer.

The parliamentary debate therefore involves two competing policy considerations: administrative consolidation versus specialised regulatory capacity.

Legislative Clause	Proposed Statutory Change	KFCB Policy Position
Sections 11–11D	Dissolution of KFCB, Board structure plus CEO provisions	Retain KFCB as a statutory agency
Sections 12–18	Transfer examination, classification, approval plus licensing functions to Ministry officers	Preserve specialised regulatory capacity
Transitional provisions	Transfer assets, liabilities, obligations plus staff redeployment	Reform existing institution rather than dissolve it
Classification framework	Ministry-led administration of film regulation	Retain dedicated classification expertise
Creative-sector regulation	Consolidated government administration	Pursue broader reforms through the Creative Economy framework

KFCB independent mandate defense

KFCB’s response is built around the specialised nature of film classification.

Under the Films and Stage Plays Act, Cap. 222, KFCB is mandated to register and license film agents, filmmakers, distributors and exhibitors.

The Board is also responsible for regulating the creation, broadcasting, distribution, exhibition and possession of film and broadcast content in Kenya.

KFCB says that regulatory role has a public-protection component.

Its stated mandate includes ensuring audiovisual content intended for public exhibition conforms to Kenya’s culture, moral values and national aspirations, while protecting minors and vulnerable adults from inappropriate content.

That mandate forms a central part of the Kenya Film Classification Board statutory independence argument.

Appearing before MPs, Oluoch defended the Board’s continued status as an independent statutory agency, arguing that its existing structure is important to delivering its regulatory responsibilities.

KFCB has also argued that the proposed dissolution would not address the gaps identified in the creative sector.

Instead, the Board has urged Parliament to consider reforms that strengthen its mandate while improving financial sustainability and regulatory effectiveness. It has also supported fast-tracking the Creative Economy Bill as a broader legislative response to challenges facing the sector.

The distinction is important because KFCB is not arguing against reform in principle.

Its submission is that reform should strengthen the regulatory institution rather than eliminate it.

Statutory merger debate takes a different direction

The political and policy conversation around the Bill has sometimes been described as a merger proposal involving creative-sector institutions.

The legislation itself, however, is more specific.

It proposes dissolving KFCB and transferring its functions to the relevant Ministry, rather than simply merging KFCB with another existing regulator.

A separate Creative Economy Bill, 2026 now provides another layer to the debate.

That Bill proposes a new institutional framework for the creative economy, including the Kenya Audio-Visual and Cinema Commission plus the Kenya Audio-Visual Regulatory Authority. It would also repeal the Films and Stage Plays Act.

The existence of the two legislative tracks makes the institutional question more complicated.

One proposal would dissolve KFCB and return its functions to the Ministry.

The other proposes a new regulatory architecture for the creative economy.

KFCB’s preference is therefore significant: the Board has asked Parliament to consider a broader sector-wide framework instead of proceeding with the dissolution proposal in isolation.

Self-classification enters the regulatory debate

The KFCB defence also comes at a time when Kenya’s film regulatory framework has been undergoing changes of its own.

The Films and Stage Plays (Self-Classification) Regulations, 2024 established a framework for self-classification of audiovisual content.

The approach recognises that the growth of digital distribution has changed the relationship between regulators, producers, broadcasters, streaming platforms and audiences.

KFCB has also been developing updated film-classification guidelines.

In 2025, the Board presented proposed Films and Stage Plays (Film Classification) Guidelines, 2024 to Parliament’s Committee on Delegated Legislation. The proposed framework included a PG-13 rating plus a Consumer Advisory Index intended to provide additional information to audiences about film content.

These developments strengthen KFCB’s argument that the regulatory environment is already being modernised.

From the Board’s perspective, the question is therefore whether institutional dissolution is necessary when regulatory systems can instead be updated to respond to digital distribution, streaming services and changing audience behaviour.

What the Bill means for local film producers

The legislative debate could have practical consequences for Kenyan filmmakers.

KFCB currently provides services covering filming licences, registration of film agents, classification, distribution, exhibition plus regulatory approvals.

A change in the institutional structure could therefore affect the way producers interact with government.

Under the proposed Ministry-led framework, filmmakers would potentially deal with licensing officers appointed by the Cabinet Secretary rather than a dedicated statutory Board.

The Bill would retain important classification functions, meaning the change does not automatically eliminate film regulation.

Instead, it changes where regulatory authority sits.

That distinction matters to producers because licensing, classification and approval decisions can affect production schedules, exhibition dates, distribution agreements and investment decisions.

A transition could also require existing licences, applications, contracts and pending regulatory matters to be moved into the new administrative structure.

The Bill’s transitional provisions seek to address those issues, but implementation would determine whether the change ultimately reduces bureaucracy or creates a temporary layer of uncertainty.

Script reviews, licensing plus content compliance

Film producers operate within a regulatory environment in which content classification can influence what audiences are permitted to view.

KFCB’s mandate covers the regulation of film content as well as licensing across different parts of the production and exhibition chain.

That means institutional changes could have implications for the handling of classification applications, regulatory correspondence and appeals.

The proposed Bill would shift powers currently exercised by the Board to the Cabinet Secretary or licensing officers.

An individual dissatisfied with a licensing officer’s decision would have an appeal route to the Cabinet Secretary under the proposed framework.

For producers, the important issue will therefore be the efficiency of the replacement system.

A centralised system could potentially create clearer administrative responsibility.

It could also raise questions about institutional checks, specialised expertise and the consistency of decisions across different categories of film and audiovisual content.

Those questions are particularly relevant as Kenya’s film sector expands beyond cinema and television into online video, streaming platforms, social media productions and other digital formats.

Child protection remains central

The strongest public-interest argument advanced by KFCB concerns children and vulnerable audiences.

The Board’s official mandate expressly identifies protection of minors and vulnerable adults from inappropriate audiovisual material as one of the reasons for regulating film and broadcast content.

That responsibility means classification is not simply a licensing exercise.

Ratings can determine whether particular content is suitable for children, while regulatory guidelines can provide producers and distributors with standards for content intended for different audiences.

The question Parliament faces is therefore whether those safeguards require an independent statutory institution or can be delivered effectively through Ministry-based licensing officers.

KFCB’s position is that its specialised institutional structure should remain.

The Bill’s approach assumes those functions can be transferred without maintaining the existing Board.

Parliament will have to weigh the administrative rationale against the operational requirements of classification, enforcement and public protection.

Local content policy faces a separate question

The proposed changes should also be considered within Kenya’s broader creative-economy ambitions.

Local film producers need a regulatory system that is predictable enough to support investment, production planning and distribution.

KFCB has previously positioned itself as part of the effort to create a facilitative regulatory environment for the local film industry.

In 2024, the Board highlighted licensing, regulation and content classification as part of its role in supporting the sector. Earlier reforms also included proposals aimed at reducing licensing costs for local filmmakers.

Any replacement system would therefore need to balance regulation with the government’s stated objective of growing Kenya’s creative economy.

A regulatory framework that becomes more centralised but slower could create different problems for producers.

Conversely, a streamlined system that preserves classification expertise could reduce some administrative burdens.

Those outcomes would ultimately depend on the regulations, staffing arrangements, institutional procedures and resources established after any legislative change.

Parliament weighs KFCB’s future

The National Assembly Sports and Culture Committee now sits at the centre of the debate.

KFCB has formally presented its objections, while the Bill remains part of the parliamentary legislative process. Parliament’s official website lists the Films and Stage Plays (Amendment) Bill, 2026 among National Assembly Bills.

The committee must therefore consider submissions from KFCB alongside the Government’s restructuring rationale and views from other stakeholders.

The Communications Authority of Kenya has also been reported as emphasising the need to preserve technical expertise, institutional capacity and independence in film classification. The Council of Governors has separately raised constitutional questions concerning the division of functions between national and county governments.

Those submissions demonstrate that the debate extends beyond KFCB itself.

It concerns the architecture of creative-sector regulation in Kenya.

The bigger creative economy question

The Films and Stage Plays Amendment Bill 2026 has opened a debate about the future of film regulation at a time when Kenya’s creative economy is expanding across cinema, television, streaming services and digital platforms.

KFCB wants its statutory position preserved, arguing that specialised regulation is necessary for classification, licensing, enforcement and protection of vulnerable audiences.

The Bill’s sponsors are pursuing a different institutional model centred on transferring the Board’s functions to the Ministry as part of a wider State-corporation restructuring programme.

A separate Creative Economy Bill adds another possible route, proposing a new regulatory structure for the sector.

The legislative question is therefore no longer simply whether KFCB should survive.

It is whether Kenya should maintain its existing specialised regulator, transfer its responsibilities directly to the Ministry or establish a new creative-economy regulatory architecture.

Until Parliament completes the legislative process, KFCB remains the statutory body exercising its powers under Cap. 222.

The August 2026 committee appearance by Nelly Oluoch has, however, made the Board’s position clear: KFCB wants reform of film regulation without surrendering the specialised statutory institution currently respons