NAIROBI, Kenya – The High Court has extended orders halting the implementation of a controversial public notice issued by the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) that allows the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) to track mobile phones for tax compliance.
Justice Chacha Mwita ruled that the suspension will remain in force until February 21, 2025, when a petition challenging the directive is set for hearing.
He also directed the respondents and interested parties to file and serve their responses and written submissions ahead of the court date.
The order follows a petition filed by the Katiba Institute, a constitutional rights advocacy group, arguing that the directive was unconstitutional and violated fundamental rights, including privacy and access to information.
The disputed notice, titled “Public Notice on Enhancing the Integrity and Tax Compliance of Mobile Devices in Kenya,” was published by CA in October.
It mandated that mobile phone assemblers, importers, and retailers, as well as mobile network operators, upload International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) numbers to a KRA portal to facilitate tax compliance monitoring.
Katiba contends that the notice was improperly issued, bypassing the legislative process and public participation as required by the Constitution.
“The regulations were neither tabled in Parliament nor subjected to public scrutiny,” the organization said in court filings.
The advocacy group further argued that the move posed a significant risk to privacy.
“Without a Data Protection Impact Assessment, the risk of violating the right to privacy and other freedoms remains unmitigated,” Katiba noted, adding that the measure could be exploited to “turn Kenya into a surveillance state.”
According to the petitioners, the lack of adequate safeguards raises concerns about misuse, including monitoring political opponents, stifling dissent, or intimidating activists—actions that could suppress free speech and democratic engagement.
Katiba also criticized the directive’s punitive nature, citing the threat of deregistration for any mobile device whose IMEI number is not disclosed.
They described this approach as a form of duress, infringing on citizens’ right to consent before personal data collection.
Justice Mwita had initially suspended the CA and KRA notices on November 22, pending a substantive hearing.
The case will now proceed to a full hearing in February 2025, where the court will determine the validity and constitutionality of the directive.
If upheld, the ruling could have far-reaching implications for privacy rights and the balance between technology regulation and government oversight in Kenya.
Justice Chacha Mwita ruled that the suspension will remain in force until February 21, 2025, when a petition challenging the directive is set for hearing.
He also directed the respondents and interested parties to file and serve their responses and written submissions ahead of the court date.
The order follows a petition filed by the Katiba Institute, a constitutional rights advocacy group, arguing that the directive was unconstitutional and violated fundamental rights, including privacy and access to information.
The disputed notice, titled “Public Notice on Enhancing the Integrity and Tax Compliance of Mobile Devices in Kenya,” was published by CA in October.
It mandated that mobile phone assemblers, importers, and retailers, as well as mobile network operators, upload International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) numbers to a KRA portal to facilitate tax compliance monitoring.
Katiba contends that the notice was improperly issued, bypassing the legislative process and public participation as required by the Constitution.
“The regulations were neither tabled in Parliament nor subjected to public scrutiny,” the organization said in court filings.
The advocacy group further argued that the move posed a significant risk to privacy.
“Without a Data Protection Impact Assessment, the risk of violating the right to privacy and other freedoms remains unmitigated,” Katiba noted, adding that the measure could be exploited to “turn Kenya into a surveillance state.”
According to the petitioners, the lack of adequate safeguards raises concerns about misuse, including monitoring political opponents, stifling dissent, or intimidating activists—actions that could suppress free speech and democratic engagement.
Katiba also criticized the directive’s punitive nature, citing the threat of deregistration for any mobile device whose IMEI number is not disclosed.
They described this approach as a form of duress, infringing on citizens’ right to consent before personal data collection.
Justice Mwita had initially suspended the CA and KRA notices on November 22, pending a substantive hearing.
The case will now proceed to a full hearing in February 2025, where the court will determine the validity and constitutionality of the directive.
If upheld, the ruling could have far-reaching implications for privacy rights and the balance between technology regulation and government oversight in Kenya.
