On 4th November 2025, We, the Bloggers Association of Kenya, the Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya), and Article 19 Eastern Africa, jointly filed a constitutional petition (Petition-ICJ Petition on Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Amendement Act) challenging key provisions of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2025. The petition argues that the amendments threaten the rights to freedom of expression, media freedom, and access to information as guaranteed under the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
The petition challenges Section 3 of the Amendment Act that amends Section 6 of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018, which empowers the National Computer and Cybercrimes Coordination Committee to direct the shutdown of websites or digital platforms believed to promote “unlawful activities,” “inappropriate sexual content of a minor,” “terrorism,” “religious extremism,” or “cultism.” These terms are vague and undefined, creating room for arbitrary interpretation and censorship without judicial oversight.
In the petition, we are asking the Court to:
-
Declare Sections 3 and 4 of the Amendment Act unconstitutional, as they violate the rights to freedom of expression, media freedom, and access to information.
-
Issue conservatory orders suspending the implementation of the contested provisions while the matter is being heard and determined.
-
Reaffirm that any restrictions on digital expression must be clear, narrowly defined, lawful, and subject to judicial oversight rather than administrative discretion.
The case was heard on 7th November 2025 before the High Court’s Constitutional and Human Rights Division, where the petitioners sought conservatory orders to suspend the implementation of the contested sections of the law pending determination of the petition.
The petition also challenges the amendment to Section 4, which amends Section 27 of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018, which now criminalizes online content considered “likely to cause someone to commit suicide.” This standard is subjective, speculative, and does not meet the legal requirement for clarity in criminal law. The statement is also likely to undermine open and accountable communication where journalists, creators, and citizens are already self-censoring to avoid criminal sanctions.
Additionally, the amendment was passed without meaningful public participation, despite directly affecting civic discourse, journalism, and digital innovation in Kenya. Therefore, threatening the online ecosystem in which thousands of Kenyan creators work, learn, and engage in public life warning that entire websites could be taken offline without a hearing or right of appeal.
The Court has directed the respondents, including the Attorney-General, the Ministry of ICT, the Ministry of Interior, the Communications Authority, the Inspector-General, and the Director of Public Prosecutions, to file their responses.
The case is scheduled for mention on 14th November 2025 for further directions.