Seven organizations on Wednesday filed a landmark public interest case challenging unlawful disruption of internet access by the government of Kenya.
The organizations include; The International Commission of Jurists, Kenya (ICJ Kenya), The Bloggers Association of Kenya (BAKE), and Paradigm Initiative (PIN).
Others are Kenya Union of Journalists (KUJ), Katiba Institute, The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) and The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA).
The organizations have cited the Communication Authority, the Attorney General, Cabinet Secretary for Information and Communication, Safaricom and Airtel Kenya over internet shutdown in 2023 and 2024.
They are seeking a judicial declaration that internet shutdowns without due process are unconstitutional abuses of state power.
The plaintiffs also want court-ordered mechanisms to ensure judicial oversight, transparency and accountability in digital governance.
High Court Judge, Justice Bahati Mwamuye issued orders stopping the sued parties from interfering with internet access until the case is heard and determined.
The complainants moved to court following credible evidence of deliberate internet throttling and blocking of Telegram during the finance bill protests and the 2024 Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) Examinations.
They said evidence of the Internet disruptions was provided by Cloudflare, IODA and The Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI).
“The restriction of access to the Internet in Kenya on three occasions in 2023 and 2024, constitute a blatant violation of Kenyans’ constitutional rights to freedom of expression (Article 33), media freedom (Article 34), access to information (Article 35), and the full realization of economic and social rights in an increasingly digital society,” the plaintiffs state.
ICJ Kenya Executive Director Eric Mukoya said Kenya was violating the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which require the country to protect digital rights.
“As organisations committed to defending civic freedoms, we condemn the escalating use of digital repression to silence dissent, manipulate information flows, and erode democratic participation,” said Mr Mukoya.
He noted that the internet is no longer a luxury but a critical enabler of political discourse, economic transactions, and even emergency response systems.
“Any restrictions must satisfy stringent legal tests under Article 24 of the Constitution which are legality, necessity and proportionality – standards systematically ignored in Kenya’s recurrent, arbitrary disruptions,” he argued.
BAKE chairperson Kennedy Kachwanya said “the outcome of the case will have far-reaching implications for millions of Kenyans who rely on unimpeded connectivity for livelihoods, education, and civic engagement.”
