Abstract
This paper argues that the periodic dissolution of electoral campaign organisations constitutes the principal source of institutional amnesia in Kenyan constituency governance. It observes that a competitive campaign for a parliamentary seat assembles, within approximately two quarters and typically from no prior institutional base, an operational capability exceeding that of the constituency office which succeeds it: sub-location-level field coverage, volunteer rosters numbering in the hundreds, daily logistics and finance functions, and a continuous stream of first-hand testimony regarding constituent needs. It contends that this last asset — effectively the largest informal needs assessment conducted in the country, however methodologically limited by self-selection and interviewer interest — is systematically discarded at the conclusion of each electoral cycle. The paper identifies three structural causes, none attributable to negligence: the legal and organisational separation of campaign vehicles from constituency offices, the seasonal dispersal of campaign personnel, and the absence of any structured format or receiving system into which unstructured campaign knowledge might be migrated. It further observes an inversion in what survives: benign and valuable needs data evaporates while sensitive contact data persists in undocumented form, a pattern the paper attributes to the absence of a designed continuity layer under the Data Protection Act, 2019. The paper concludes that the relevant intervention is continuity infrastructure rather than campaign effectiveness tooling, and proposes as a falsifiable test whether any Kenyan constituency office can commence a term holding a structured, sourced record of constituent requests from the preceding campaign.