Key Developments in Kenya’s Cybercrime Law Challenges
At the Milimani High Court, a significant shift has been observed in the ongoing legal battles surrounding Kenya’s recently amended cybercrime law. The State and multiple petitioners have shown signs of moving toward a shared understanding, marking an important step in the consolidation of constitutional challenges.
Procedural Clarity and Initial Steps
On Thursday, Justice Lawrence Mugambi outlined the court’s approach to handling the cases. He emphasized that the first priority would be addressing pending applications before proceeding with the consolidation of petitions. This step aimed to clarify the procedural path for all involved parties.
Representing the Attorney General’s office, lawyer Paul Nyamodi highlighted that while there had been no formal consensus, there had also been no active effort to create one. He noted that discussions had begun but had not yet led to substantial progress.
However, after a brief recess granted by the court for informal consultations, the parties reported some movement towards agreement. Upon resuming, Nyamodi informed the court that progress had been made in aligning their positions.
Agreement on Rejoinder Applications and Conservatory Orders
Nyamodi stated that the parties had agreed to streamline rejoinder applications by admitting all applicants seeking to be enjoined as interested parties into the respective matters they had applied for. This decision was intended to ensure a more efficient process.
Additionally, the parties reached an understanding regarding existing conservatory orders, particularly those related to provisions of the amended law dealing with cyber harassment, prosecutorial powers, and the potential shutdown of digital platforms. They agreed to refine the wording of these interim orders to specify that only certain amended sections of the law would remain suspended.
“The parties agreed that the conservatory orders be adjusted to attach to the amended provisions of Section 27(1)(b), particularly the inclusion of the phrase referring to conduct ‘likely to cause another person to commit suicide,’” Nyamodi explained.
Specific Agreements on Petitions
Further consensus was reached on conservatory orders sought in the Kerugoya petition, which challenges the inclusion of a new clause under Section 6(1)(j)(a) of the parent Act. This provision grants the government authority to direct the shutdown of social media platforms or applications in specific circumstances.
It was agreed that the interim orders in that petition, filed by Kirinyaga MP Jane Njeri, would be extended and continue to apply to the contested amendment until the matter is heard and determined.
“All parties who have made applications to be joined as interested parties will be admitted in the respective matters they applied for,” Nyamodi confirmed.
The parties also agreed to consolidate at least six petitions to ensure uniform handling of the contested provisions.
Next Steps and Future Directions
Justice Mugambi welcomed the progress and directed parties who were yet to file responses to do so by Friday, November 14, 2025, when the matter will return to court for compliance.
The petitions, filed by several litigants including gospel musician and activist Reuben Kigame, the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), Embakasi East MP and advocate Babu Owino, Kirinyaga MP Jane Njeri, and public litigant Francis Owino, challenge various aspects of the amended law, citing concerns over its implications for free speech, digital rights, and online expression.
The High Court will issue further directions after reviewing the agreement placed before it.