The 2025 Special 301 Report on Intellectual Property Protection and Enforcement has cited Kenya as one of the leading markets for counterfeit goods. This position reinforces the call for better mechanisms to bolster Intellectual Property Rights for all market players.

The US position

The report from the office of the United States Trade Representative states that its top priority is to use all available sources of leverage to encourage other countries to open their market to US exports while providing adequate protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. Given that the US is keen on protecting its innovation and creativity in foreign markets, IP infringement, including patent infringement, trademark counterfeiting, copyright piracy and trade secret theft, causes significant financial losses for right holders and legitimate businesses.  IP infringement can undermine U.S. competitive advantages in innovation and creativity, to the detriment of American workers and businesses.

Global Impact of IP Infringement

For consumers, IP infringement leads to exposure to health and safety risks. At the same time, trade in counterfeit and pirated products often fuels cross-border organised criminal networks, increasing exploitative labour practices, and hindering sustainable economic development in many countries. In addition, legitimate producers/manufacturers face declining revenue, decreased investment incentives and reputational damage due to counterfeiting.

Kenya’s role and challenges

Kenya’s designation in the report stems from its role as a transit and destination market for counterfeit goods. Structural issues such as weak enforcement, limited public awareness, and resource constraints in regulatory bodies exacerbate the problem. The influx of counterfeit goods adversely affects Kenyan manufacturers and deters foreign investors operating locally.

The report states that the problem of trademark counterfeiting continues globally and involves the production, transhipment, and sale of a vast array of fake goods. Most of these goods make their way from China to markets in Chile, Hong Kong, Kyrgyz Republic, Singapore, Türkiye, and the United Arab Emirates to third-country markets such as Brazil, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Paraguay, and Russia, which are reported to have ineffective or inadequate IP enforcement systems.  

The Anti-Counterfeit Authority (ACA)

The ACA is Kenya’s main anti-counterfeiting body. Its mandate is to promote legitimate trade by enforcing Intellectual Property Rights. To enhance public awareness, the ACA conducts diverse programs such as open forums, roadshows, media campaigns, and exhibitions, targeting consumer behaviour and attitudes. The Authority also maintains strong alliances with domestic and international entities, including the Kenya Association of Manufacturers, Kenya Private Sector Alliance, consumer protection groups, the East African Shippers Council, the East African Business Community, and international organisations like Interpol, the European Union, and the International Trademark Organisation.

What needs to change

While providing a necessary foundation, Kenya’s legislative framework for intellectual property must evolve to respond to the growing complexity and digital sophistication of modern counterfeiting. As counterfeit networks become more agile and tech-enabled, there is an urgent need to revise the Anti-Counterfeit Act to address challenges such as digital piracy and the rise of cross-border e-commerce platforms. In parallel, penalties for infringement should be significantly strengthened to act as a credible deterrent, particularly for large-scale and repeat offenders. Establishing specialised IP courts or tribunals would expedite the resolution of IP disputes, while harmonising Kenya’s legal regime with regional and international IP standards (including TRIPS, ARIPO, and WIPO frameworks) would facilitate improved cross-border enforcement.

At the enforcement level, capacity building across frontline institutions is critical. Law enforcement officers, customs agents, border control authorities, and judiciary members must have the knowledge and tools to identify and prosecute IP crimes effectively. This includes routine technical training, the deployment of authentication and verification technologies, and investment in digital supply chain tracking systems. Equally important is forming multi-agency task forces—bringing together the ACA, Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA), Kenya Bureau of Standards (KBS), Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), and other key stakeholders—to enable coordinated operations and real-time intelligence sharing.

Counterfeiting is not confined within national borders; it is a transnational issue that demands robust regional and global cooperation. Kenya must intensify collaboration within the East African Community (EAC), COMESA, and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) to align enforcement strategies and enhance information exchange. In addition, deeper engagement with international organisations such as Interpol, WIPO, and the United States is essential to gain access to technical assistance, funding support, and global enforcement networks. Adopting digital trade monitoring tools that trace product origins and track movements across borders will further enhance early detection and prevention of counterfeit inflows.

The role of the private sector cannot be understated. Brand owners, industry groups, and associations must become more proactive partners in the fight against counterfeiting. This includes sharing intelligence on counterfeit networks, securing supply chains to limit entry points for fake goods, and supporting legal action and policy advocacy to reinforce enforcement mechanisms. A united front between government and industry is essential to dismantle counterfeit networks and promote a transparent market environment.

In conclusion, Kenya stands at a crossroads: either intensifying IP enforcement to protect legitimate businesses and consumers or risking further reputational damage and economic loss. The 2025 Special 301 Report should catalyse decisive action, prompting stakeholders across the public and private sectors to collaborate in safeguarding the nation’s economic and innovative future.