Duale Links Murang’a AfyaKE System to NIS Amid Shutdown Dispute

NAIROBI, Kenya — Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale has claimed that Murang’a County’s digital health system was hosted on a platform owned by the National Intelligence Service (NIS), as a dispute between the national government and the county intensifies over the reported shutdown of its AfyaKE platform.

Duale said Murang’a was among three counties that had previously operated health information systems hosted on the NIS platform during former President Uhuru Kenyatta’s administration.

According to the CS, Makueni and Tharaka-Nithi counties subsequently migrated their systems to the National Digital Health Integration System under the Digital Health Agency (DHA), while Murang’a, led by Governor Irungu Kang’ata, had yet to agree to the transition.

“There were three counties that were using a system that did not belong to the Ministry of Health. And I'll say today that system belonged to the National Intelligence Service under President Uhuru's government, Makueni, Tharaka Nithi, and Murang’a,” Duale said during an interview on Citizen TV’s Sunday Live.

He added that the other two counties had transitioned to the government-backed platform following discussions with their respective governors.

Duale Says Migration Talks Have Continued for Nine Months

The Health CS said the Ministry of Health had been engaging Kang’ata for approximately nine months in an effort to facilitate Murang’a’s migration to the national digital health platform.

However, the discussions have reportedly failed to produce an agreement, leaving the county and the ministry at odds over the management and future of its digital health infrastructure.

The dispute follows claims by the Murang’a County Government that the Ministry of Health shut down its AfyaKE digital health platform, disrupting operations at healthcare facilities across the county.

The county has argued that the reported shutdown affected access to patient records and the processing of claims under the Social Health Authority (SHA), raising concerns about the continuity of healthcare services.

Murang’a Takes Legal Action Over AfyaKE Shutdown

Murang’a County has moved to court to challenge the reported shutdown, seeking legal redress over what it describes as interference with its digital healthcare operations.

In court documents, the county alleged that the Ministry of Health, through its agents, switched off the AfyaKE system as part of the transition to the Health Management Information System (HMIS).

The county claims the move left more than 170 health facilities unable to operate normally, with disruptions affecting access to digital patient records and other essential functions.

Murang’a has also questioned whether HMIS can adequately support the services previously provided through AfyaKE, particularly telemedicine.

The county maintains that telemedicine is an important component of healthcare delivery in its facilities and has raised concerns about the capacity of the replacement system to support this function.

The dispute has consequently expanded beyond a disagreement over software migration to questions about patient care, digital infrastructure and the authority responsible for managing health information systems.

Ministry Denies Ownership of AfyaKE System

The Ministry of Health has rejected claims that it owns, controls or manages the AfyaKE platform, distancing itself from allegations that it directly shut down the system.

In a statement dated October 15, 2026, Duale said AfyaKE was a private arrangement between the Murang’a County Government and the system’s developers.

He also maintained that the ministry did not possess the system’s source code.

“The system is a private arrangement between the County Government of Murang’a and its developers,” Duale said.

The CS further stated that the Digital Health Agency had not refused to certify AfyaKE, explaining that neither the county government nor the platform’s developers had submitted an application for certification.

The ministry’s position places the focus on the ownership, certification and regulatory status of the platform, while Murang’a continues to challenge the circumstances surrounding its reported shutdown.

Digital Health Transition Raises Questions Over Service Continuity

The disagreement highlights the challenges involved in transitioning county-level digital health systems to a nationally coordinated platform.

The government has been pursuing greater integration of digital health services through the Digital Health Agency, with the aim of supporting a more coordinated approach to health information management.

However, the Murang’a dispute underscores the importance of ensuring that system migrations do not interrupt essential services, particularly where patient records, billing processes, insurance claims and telemedicine are involved.

For healthcare facilities, reliable access to patient information is critical to clinical decision-making and the continuity of treatment. Disruptions to digital platforms can also affect administrative processes and the processing of claims under the Social Health Authority.

The competing accounts from the ministry and the county leave key questions about the reported shutdown, the platform’s technical status and the transition arrangements unresolved.

What Happens Next?

The legal challenge by Murang’a County could help clarify the responsibilities of the national government, the Digital Health Agency and the county administration in the management and transition of digital health systems.

The outcome may also have wider implications for other counties operating independently developed health information platforms as the government advances national digital health integration.

For residents and healthcare workers in Murang’a, the immediate concern remains the uninterrupted delivery of medical services and access to essential patient information.

Until the dispute is resolved, questions surrounding AfyaKE’s operational status, certification and possible migration to HMIS are likely to remain central to the ongoing disagreement.