Kenya Court of Appeal Upholds Abortion Ban Except to Save Mother’s Life

The Court of Appeal has revived criminal charges against a minor and a health worker in an abortion case, reversing a prior High Court ruling that had halted their legal proceedings.
In a verdict issued in Malindi on April 24, 2026, the appellate judges determined that the trial should continue, stating the High Court made a mistake by dismissing the charges before all evidence could be thoroughly examined during court proceedings.
The matter concerns a young person known as PAK, who was taken into custody in 2019 following a miscarriage when she sought medical assistance at a healthcare facility in Kilifi County. Subsequently, she faced accusations of facilitating an abortion, while the medical professional who treated her was charged with providing substances intended to end the pregnancy.
Legal documentation indicates the young woman had endured intense discomfort and substantial blood loss before obtaining medical care. Reports suggest she was apprehended from her hospital bed and held, an experience she characterized as deeply distressing and humiliating.
The High Court had previously supported her position, determining that her detention, compelled medical assessment, and legal action infringed upon her constitutional entitlements, encompassing dignity, confidentiality, and the right to medical services.
The judicial panel dismissed the charges and urged the development of more explicit abortion regulations in Kenya.
Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal adopted an alternative perspective.
The jurists maintained that although the Constitution safeguards the right to life from the moment of conception, abortions are permissible only in restricted situations, such as when the mother’s life or health faces danger or when urgent medical intervention is necessary.
They stressed that abortion does not constitute an independent constitutional entitlement but rather an exception permitted only under precise legal parameters.
The appellate judges additionally asserted that allegations of rights infringements do not necessarily warrant suspending criminal legal actions. They indicated that the trial court serves as the appropriate venue to evaluate evidence, ascertain whether the abortion contravened the law, and assess any constitutional justifications presented by the defendants.
The tribunal cautioned that legal proceedings should only be terminated in unambiguous instances of procedural misuse or when justice cannot be obtained through trial proceedings.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal annulled the High Court decision and mandated that the criminal matters in Kilifi be reinstated and adjudicated based on their merits.
The ruling now compels both the young individual and the healthcare provider to return to trial in a case that continues to attract nationwide focus on reproductive health entitlements and Kenya’s stringent abortion legislation.