Kenyan Media Groups Challenge Cybercrime Law in Court Appeal

Kenyan journalists, bloggers and lawyers mounted a fierce legal challenge Wednesday against the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, telling the Court of Appeal that the controversial 2018 law has become a weapon for silencing dissent and violating digital rights.

The Bloggers Association of Kenya, Law Society of Kenya, and Kenya Union of Journalists presented a united front before Justices Patrick Kiage, Aggrey Muchelule and Weldon Korir, arguing that enforcement of the law has led to arrests, harassment and even deaths linked to online expression.

“Since its operationalisation, the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act has become a weapon for the ruling elite,” lawyer Mercy Mutemi told the court, representing the blogger’s association.

She cited numerous cases of abuse, including bloggers arrested for alleged “fake news,” an author detained over a presidential biography, and a software developer targeted for creating a Finance Bill monitoring tool.

The most damning example presented was the death of teacher Albert Ojwang while in police custody, allegedly over a social media post. Mutemi described this as “the most egregious example” of the law’s dangerous overreach.

The appellants challenged 13 criminal offences under the Act, including publication of false information, cyber harassment, and unauthorized interception.

They argued that Section 50, which mandates courts to grant police warrants for digital information access, has reduced judicial oversight to a “rubber stamp” process.

Parliamentary records suggest the law was designed as a “panic response” to shield politicians from online criticism rather than address genuine cybersecurity concerns, the petitioners argued.

They also faulted lawmakers for adding significant amendments at committee stage without public consultation.

However, the Attorney-General, Director of Public Prosecutions, and National Assembly defended the law’s constitutionality.

Lead government lawyer Paul Nyamodi argued that regulation of human activity through technology is necessary and that freedom of expression cannot infringe on others’ rights.

“Libel cannot be constitutionally protected speech,” Nyamodi said, urging the judges to uphold a 2020 High Court ruling by Justice James Makau that found the Act constitutional and balanced individual rights against public interests.

The media groups are seeking to nullify the entire law, discharge all ongoing cases under the Act, and halt surveillance of social media users.

They argue that less restrictive alternatives, such as civil defamation suits, could protect reputations without criminalizing speech.

The Court of Appeal reserved judgment until February 27, 2026, in a case that could reshape Kenya’s digital rights landscape and determine whether the controversial law survives constitutional scrutiny.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​