NAIROBI, Kenya — The Attorney General and the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) have asked the High Court to lift conservatory orders that halted the implementation of sections of the newly enacted Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2025.
Appearing before Justice Lawrence Mugambi, the two offices argued that their application to vacate the suspension should be heard and determined before the court proceeds with consolidating six petitions challenging the constitutionality of the contested provisions.
Through lawyers Emmanuel Bitta and Paul Nyamodi for the Attorney General, and Patrick Lutts for the CA, the respondents said the orders were issued ex parte—without their participation—and that the petitioners, Reuben Kigame and the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), failed to comply with the directive to serve them with submissions.
“We have no doubt that when the orders were issued, the court took into account that they were made ex parte and directed the petitioners to serve the respondents with the application and submissions,” the AG’s office stated.
The State further contended that it was only fair and just for the government to be granted a chance to challenge the interim suspension, saying the enforcement freeze is affecting the implementation of vital cybersecurity and digital governance measures.
“I urge that before hearing the application on consolidation, the court should first hear our application for stay and determine it,” submitted lawyer Nyamodi, representing the AG.
The AG also noted that the Court of Appeal is currently handling Civil Appeal No. 197 of 2010 — Bloggers Association of Kenya v Attorney General & 4 others — a case contesting the constitutionality of Section 27 of the Cybercrimes Act on similar grounds.
According to the AG, proceeding with fresh High Court hearings while a related matter is pending before the appellate court would be “premature and prejudicial.”
The State, therefore, asked Justice Mugambi to stay or vacate the conservatory orders issued on October 22, pending the determination of its application.
The suspended sections of the Cybercrimes Act were challenged in six separate petitions by rights groups, journalists, and digital activists who argue that the provisions infringe on freedom of expression, privacy, and media rights guaranteed under Articles 31, 33, and 34 of the Constitution.
The High Court had temporarily halted implementation of the contested sections pending full hearing and determination of the matter.
Justice Mugambi directed that the case be mentioned on November 5 for further directions on consolidation and the hearing of the State’s application.
