A new case has been lodged at the Milimani Law Courts challenging the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, with petitioners arguing that it violates several fundamental rights guaranteed under the Kenyan Constitution.
The petition filed by the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and activist Reuben Kigame calls for multiple declarations that the law is unconstitutional, null, and void, citing infringements on the rights to privacy, freedom of expression, access to information, and fair administrative action as protected under Articles 10, 24, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, and 47 of the Constitution.
Petitioners Decry Overreach and Vague Provisions
The contested amendments, signed into law by President William Ruto on October 15, 2025, have sparked concerns over what critics describe as vague and overbroad clauses that could be used to stifle online expression and erode Kenya’s Data Protection Act (2019).
A key point of contention is a clause criminalising the sharing of “false, misleading, or mischievous” information a phrase petitioners argue is subjective and open to abuse, potentially targeting journalists, whistleblowers, and critics of the government.
Another controversial provision mandates the verification of all social media accounts, requiring users to link their profiles to government-issued identification. Petitioners say this move threatens digital privacy, anonymity, and freedom of online participation.
Alleged Procedural Violations in Parliament
The petition also accuses the National Assembly of procedural violations, asserting that the Bill should have been treated as one affecting county governments under Article 110 of the Constitution and, therefore, referred to the Senate. The failure to do so, they argue, renders the entire legislative process unconstitutional.
Additionally, the petition challenges amendments to Section 27 of the Principal Act, which criminalises communication that may cause another person to commit suicide. The petitioners describe this clause as ambiguous, speculative, and impossible to enforce fairly.
Seeking Court Intervention
The petitioners now seek a permanent injunction prohibiting the implementation of the disputed sections pending a full court determination.
They maintain that the law lacks clear legal standards, giving authorities excessive discretion that could lead to arbitrary arrests and suppression of free speech in Kenya’s digital space.
