One Roof, Many Trades: The Architectural And Quantity Surveying Practitioners Bill, 2026
The Architectural and Quantity Surveying Practitioners Bill, 2026 (the Bill) is one of the most consequential legislative interventions yet proposed for Kenya’s built-environment sector. It seeks to repeal the Architects and Quantity Surveyors Act (Cap. 525), and to replace it with a substantially broader statutory architecture that draws landscape architecture, interior design and construction project management into a single regulatory net alongside construction architecture and quantity surveying. In doing so, the Bill departs from the narrower, discipline-specific model that has historically governed professional regulation in Kenya, and instead adopts an omnibus approach: one Board, one register, one disciplinary regime, for an expanding family of built-environment professions.
The Bill's stated purpose is to modernise a regulatory framework that has remained largely static since the enactment of Cap. 525. The existing Cap. 525 established the Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQS) as a joint regulator for the cognate, but professionally distinct, disciplines. Proponents of the reform argue that Cap. 525 no longer reflects the realities of contemporary practice: it does not contemplate landscape architecture, interior design or construction project management as regulated professions, it is largely silent on emerging concerns such as artificial intelligence in design practice, green building standards and climate-change mitigation, and its enforcement architecture is widely regarded as too weak to deter unlicensed practice.
The Bill establishes the Architectural and Quantity Surveying Practitioners Board, which will oversee training, registration, licensing, professional conduct and discipline. It will maintain registers of professionals and technicians, regulate professional firms, accredit continuing professional education, determine professional fees and oversee project registration. The Bill makes a valid practicing license mandatory for professional practice and regulates the use of professional titles.
Foreign professionals may be registered subject to prescribed qualifications and work-permit requirements, with temporary registration available for specific projects.
The Board will have inspection and enforcement powers, including authority for authorised officers to inspect building sites to ensure compliance with professional standards. The Bill further introduces stricter penalties for unlawful practice including: fraudulent procurement of registration which may attract a fine of up to KES 2 million, imprisonment for up to two years, or both; practising without a licence may attract a fine of up to KES 2 million or imprisonment for up to three years. The Bill also prohibits unauthorised use of protected professional titles and employment of unregistered persons to provide regulated services. Professional misconduct will be dealt with through an Ethics and Disciplinary Committee, with possible sanctions including admonishment, fines, suspension of up to five years and removal from the professional Register or Roll.
Finally, the Bill contains transitional provisions ensuring continuity. Upon commencement, the existing legislation will be repealed, the assets and staff of the former Board will transfer to the new Board, and persons already registered as architects or quantity surveyors will be deemed registered under the new law, preserving continuity of practice rights.
Conclusion
The legislation constitutes a notable advancement in the construction sector. However, major concerns raised by professionals over regulation by a single built-environment Board calibrated to the registration thresholds, disciplinary norms and fee structures familiar to architects, quantity surveyors and other professionals in the built environment have spited several debates. The concern voiced by built-environment professionals is not unique to their sector, and a comparison with Kenya's agricultural regulatory framework helps to illustrate why. Tea and coffee are, in commercial terms, closely related: both are smallholder-dominant export cash crops, both pass through processing, auction and export stages, and both are central to rural livelihoods and foreign exchange earnings. Despite this kinship, Kenyan law has consistently regulated the two crops through separate statutory bodies and distinct legal instruments.
The experience of Kenya's tea and coffee sectors kindred industries regulated separately because of their differences offers a useful cautionary parallel as the Bill proceeds through further legislative scrutiny.
Author Sophie Jael Obat
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For tailored advice, please reach out to us directly at sarinke@mckayadvocates.com
Comments