LSK challenges surveillance law at Supreme Court

The Law Society of Kenya (LSK), in collaboration with the Bloggers Association of Kenya (BAKE), Article 19 East Africa and the Kenya Union of Journalists (KUJ), has approached the Supreme Court to contest provisions in the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018, asserting that the legislation grants excessive monitoring powers to government authorities over private communications.
Through a court petition, the applicants are contesting Sections 48 to 53 of the legislation, which empower authorities to intercept digital communications, access subscriber details, and conduct searches in the course of cybercrime investigations.
This legal action follows a March 2026 decision by the Court of Appeal that struck down Sections 22 and 23 of the law, which had criminalized the dissemination of false or misleading information online.
In that judgment, the judges characterized the sections as “similar to unguided missiles that could ensnare innocent citizens,” indicating that they endangered freedom of expression.
Nonetheless, the Court of Appeal permitted the surveillance-related provisions to remain active, leading to the current appeal to the Supreme Court.
The petitioners contend that the law enables State agencies to monitor emails, telephone conversations, and other digital exchanges for a period of up to nine months.
They also assert that internet service providers and telecommunications firms can be compelled to provide subscriber information without adequate protective measures.
The organizations additionally maintain that the legislation grants authorities the authority to search individuals present at locations targeted in cybercrime probes, despite what they characterize as insufficient judicial supervision.
According to the petitioners, the disputed sections contravene Articles 31 and 33 of the Constitution, which safeguard the right to privacy and freedom of expression.
“The question before the court is whether these surveillance capabilities satisfy the constitutional standard necessary in a democratic society,” the petitioners indicate in their court documents.
The Supreme Court has designated the matter as urgent, facilitating expedited proceedings in a case anticipated to influence the future of digital rights, online liberties, and State surveillance practices in Kenya.
Individuals named as respondents in the litigation comprise the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Office of the Attorney General, the National Police Service represented by the Inspector General, and the National Assembly of Kenya through its Speaker.