Kenya’s decision to grant undocumented East African nationals 90 days to regularise their status has brought immigration enforcement back into focus. While the immediate debate centres on undocumented migrants and foreign traders, the policy poses a broader test for Kenya’s migration governance: enforcing immigration laws while protecting refugees and asylum seekers and maintaining its commitments to East African regional integration.  

The 90-day window is particularly significant for Burundian nationals. Kenya hosts about 16,000 Burundian refugees and asylum seekers, according to UNHCR data. This is alongside other Burundian nationals who may be living, working or conducting business under different legal arrangements. An undocumented Burundian could therefore be a recognised refugee, an asylum seeker, an East African Community (EAC) national without the required documentation, someone with expired papers, or an individual with no lawful basis to remain.  

Enforcement Needs to Start with Status  

The priority should be to establish who falls within each category. This requires coordination among immigration authorities, refugee authorities, labour officials, county governments, and, where necessary, the relevant embassies. Recognised refugees should remain within the refugee protection framework, while asylum seekers should continue through the asylum process. EAC nationals working or conducting business in Kenya should be directed to the documentation applicable to regional mobility. Those eligible for regularisation should be assisted in complying with the relevant requirements.  

Individuals without a lawful basis to remain can then be dealt with through appropriate procedures. The distinction is important. Effective immigration enforcement depends on knowing who is being dealt with and why. Without this, a regularisation exercise risks becoming a broad enforcement operation that treats people with very different legal circumstances in the same way. The economic dimension of refugee protection also warrants attention. Kenya’s Refugees Act, 2021, provides a framework for refugee protection while allowing refugees to participate in economic activity, subject to applicable requirements. For a Burundian refugee operating a small business, lawful participation could involve establishing refugee status, obtaining the necessary work authorisation, registering the business, securing county licences, and meeting tax obligations.   

Matching Protection with Implementation  

The government has indicated that people who come forward to register will be protected throughout the process. That commitment must be reflected across the agencies responsible for enforcement. Immigration officers, police, and county enforcement teams should have clear instructions on how to identify individuals undergoing regularisation. A verifiable temporary status would help prevent those who have entered the process from being subjected to enforcement while their applications are considered.  

Accessible mechanisms for reporting harassment, discrimination and xenophobic attacks would also strengthen confidence in the process. This matters because regularisation will succeed only if affected populations trust the system. If registration is perceived as an immediate pathway to detention or deportation, people may avoid coming forward, undermining the purpose of the 90-day window. The situation also has a wider EAC dimension. Kenya and Burundi are both members of the East African Community, whose Common Market framework facilitates the movement of people and workers.  

Kenya is entitled to enforce its immigration, labour and business regulations. However, regional integration also requires predictable systems for EAC citizens seeking to work, trade or establish businesses across member states. When documentation requirements are unclear or difficult to navigate, irregularity can be as much an administrative problem as an enforcement one. Kenya should therefore use the current exercise to identify and address barriers that make lawful mobility difficult.  

Turning the Window into a Governance Opportunity  

The regularisation period could offer Kenya an opportunity to strengthen migration management beyond the immediate exercise. Temporary one-stop centres in areas with significant foreign populations could bring together immigration, refugee, labour and county officials. Officials could screen individuals and direct them to the appropriate process without having to navigate multiple government offices.  

The exercise would also generate better data on the number of foreign nationals in the country, their legal status, areas of economic activity, and documentation gaps. This would give the government a stronger basis for future migration policy and enable enforcement resources to be targeted more effectively.  

Success should therefore not be measured primarily by arrests or deportations. More meaningful indicators would include the number of eligible individuals regularised, the number of refugees and asylum seekers appropriately protected, the number of EAC nationals obtaining the required documentation, and the number of informal businesses entering the formal economy.  

The Burundian situation is ultimately about more than undocumented migrants. It tests whether Kenya can enforce its immigration laws without undermining refugee protection or regional integration. The 90-day period offers an opportunity to bring these objectives into a more coherent system: protecting those entitled to protection, supporting lawful economic participation, facilitating regional mobility, and taking proportionate enforcement action where there is no lawful basis to remain.