Petition filed to halt Ruto's controversial Cybercrimes Law

A petition has been filed in the High Court challenging the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, a controversial law signed by President William Ruto last Wednesday, October 15, 2025. 

The petitioners, renowned gospel singer and activist Reuben Kigame and the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), want the court to issue interim orders to suspend the implementation and enforcement of the newly amended law.

"The court be pleased to issue a conservatory order barring the respondents, their agents, servants, employees or anyone acting on their behest, from implementing, enforcing, or acting pursuant to the provisions of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024."

The petitioners argue that the amendment, which introduces significant changes to the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018, is unconstitutional and should not take effect.

 In their petition, they highlight several constitutional violations, including procedural flaws in the passage of the law and its potential to infringe on fundamental rights.

According to the petitioners, the government and MPs hurriedly and procedurally improperly passed the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Bill, 2024, and procured its assent by the President on 15th October 2025, in blatant violation of the prescribed constitutional process.

They also assert that the law was fast-tracked through the National Assembly without being sent to the Senate, in contravention of Article 110 of the Constitution. 

"The Bill, being a bill concerning county governments, was never referred to the Senate for consideration as mandatorily required under Article 110 of the Constitution, rendering the resultant Act unconstitutional, null and void," Kigame states in his affidavit.

Further, the petitioners argue that the amendment contains vague provisions that could lead to abuse, particularly concerning freedom of expression and privacy rights. 

"The substantive amendments introduced by the Act are vague, overbroad, and ambiguous, creating offences that lack legal certainty and fail to meet the criteria for limiting rights under Article 24 of the Constitution," they state. "The implementation of the impugned Act will immediately and irreparably violate the Petitioners’ and the public’s fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to privacy, freedom of expression, freedom of the media, access to information, and freedom of association under Articles 31, 33, 34, 35, and 36 of the Constitution."

Specifically, they point to the criminalization of the publication of “false, misleading, or fictitious data,” a provision they say is overly broad and unclear.

 "The lack of clarity could lead to arbitrary enforcement, severely curbing free speech," says Kigame, the first petitioner.

Further, the petitioners object to a provision requiring social media users to verify their accounts with legal names, arguing that this infringes on the right to privacy and anonymous speech, which is protected under Article 31 of the Kenyan Constitution. 

“The mandatory verification will restrict the ability to express oneself freely online and will disproportionately impact marginalized voices,” stated Kigame.

Another significant concern raised by the petitioners is the conflict between the new amendments and the Data Protection Act, 2019. 

The petitioners claim that the amendments create a conflicting legal framework, which undermines existing data protection standards.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), the second petitioner, echoed these concerns, asserting that the Act fails to meet the criteria for limiting constitutional rights, as outlined in Article 24 of the Constitution.

In their application, filed under Articles 22, 23, 159, and other relevant provisions of the Constitution, the petitioners urge the High Court to issue an order suspending the operationalization of the law until the constitutional issues raised can be fully addressed.

 "If the law is allowed to take effect, it will irreparably harm our rights and freedoms. The public interest in protecting digital freedoms outweighs any potential harm to the respondents," the petitioners argued.

will issue the requested orders. 

Through lawyers Mutuma Gichuru & Associates, the petitioners’ lawyers, emphasized the urgency of the matter, stressing that the amendment’s enforcement could lead to “immediate and irreversible prejudice” to digital freedoms.

The Attorney General, the Speaker of the National Assembly, and other interested parties, including the Kenya Union of Journalists and the Law Society of Kenya, have been named as respondents and are expected to respond to the petition.

The petition and application is pending hearing.