From ... in Research — Nov 7, 2025

Kenya: New Cybercrime Amendments Threaten Online Expression

(Nairobi, November 6, 2025) – Kenya’s newly enacted Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendments) Act, 2025, risks criminalizing legitimate online speech and its overbroad provisions should be repealed, Human Rights Watch said today. The ame

The amendment was passed by Parliament and assented to by President William Ruto on October 15.

The Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act was initially enacted in 2018, apparently to address legitimate concerns such as cyber fraud, identity theft, and data breaches, but included provisions that criminalized “false or fictitious” news and imposed hefty sentences for violations.

The amendments broaden the already problematic law in ways that further criminalize protected speech. Civil society groups in Kenya have warned that the amendments to unlawfully expand government powers could suppress dissent and restrict online speech. “The amendments to the cybercrime law provide Kenyan authorities with greater power to restrict online speech using overbroad provisions,” said Otsieno Namwaya, associate Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Kenya’s Constitution and international human rights standards guarantee the right to freedom of expression, and laws like this undermine that right.” Parliament published the draft amendments on August 9, 2024, raising alarm among civil society and human rights advocates. On October 22, 2025, the High Court suspended section 27(1)(b), (c) and (2) of the 2018 law pending a constitutional review prompted by a legal challenge by the Kenya Human Rights Commission and others.

These provisions criminalize communication that “detrimentally affects a person or is of an indecent or grossly offensive nature.” Individuals found guilty of cyber harassment face up to 10 years in prison or a fine of 20 million Kenyan shillings, or both. Other problematic provisions, however, have come into force with the adoption of the law in October. For example, Section 3 expands the authority of the National Computer and Cybercrime Co-ordination Committee (NC4) under Section 6(1)(j(a)) of the principal Act to make websites or applications that promote “unlawful activities and religious extremism” inaccessible. Section 5 amends Section 30 which criminalizes phishing through email or call. While these provisions could be used to pursue legitimate aims, such vague language risks penalizing unsolicited calls or personal calls whose original intention was not fraudulent. It also could lead to arbitrary harassment by the authorities of investigative journalists or citizens expressing dissent or criticism. Kenyans have increasingly used direct communications with elected officials including calls and emails to express support or discontent over government policies.

These provisions could be applied to criminalize participatory governance.

The 2025 amendments build on an already flawed law. In 2019, Human Rights Watch noted that certain provisions of the original law could stifle online freedoms. Kenyan authorities have already used the law to silence dissent. Bonface Mondi Nyangla, a blogger, was charged for allegedly posting offensive remarks about Evans Kidero, former governor of Nairobi County and a political commentator, Maverick Aoko, faced cyber harassment charges for her controversial online posts. Civil society organizations including the Kenya ICT Action Network, ARTICLE 19, and the Bloggers Association of Kenya, have consistently raised concerns about the law’s vague provisions and potential for abuse. While Parliament held some consultations during the amendment process, the Bloggers Association of Kenya criticized them as inadequate. ARTICLE 19 and Kenya ICT Action Network also called for stronger judicial oversight and urged lawmakers to ensure the law is aligned with Kenya’s constitutional and international obligations. Some of the provisions of the August 2024 draft amendments were improved in the 2025 draft. This includes section 6(1)(j(a)), which previously granted the NC4 unchecked powers to restrict access to websites and applications and now requires judicial oversight under the newly amended section 46A.

These improvements, though positive, are insufficient.

The new amended law still has vague and overbroad provisions including Sections 3 and 5 which threaten the constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression. On October 29, Kennedy Kachwanya, the Bloggers Association of Kenya chairperson, told Human Rights Watch that the amended Act creates an unacceptable threat to digital rights and freedom of expression.

The group has urged Kenyan authorities to immediately suspend and review the problematic provisions to ensure strict adherence to constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and fundamental freedoms. Similar laws have been used across Africa to stifle online expression. In Nigeria, the Cybercrimes Act, 2015 has been invoked to arrest journalists and activists for criticizing public officials. In Tanzania, online content regulations have also led to arbitrary attacks on journalists and government critics. Kenya’s amendments place it among countries that use cybercrime laws to abuse online freedoms and suppress dissenting voices, Human Rights Watch said. Article 33 of the Kenyan Constitution, 2010 guarantees the right to freedom of expression, subject only to reasonable and justifiable limitations in a democratic society. Principle 22 of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights’ Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, 2019, also requires states to repeal laws criminalizing insult and false news, and to avoid prison terms custodial sentences for speech-related offenses. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Kenya is a party, protects the right to freedom of expression, including political speech and criticism of public officials.

The UN Human Rights Committee through General Comment No. 34, clarified that Article 19 applies to online expression and emphasized that restrictions must be clearly defined, accessible and predictable. Vague terms such as “extremism” or “offensive” are broadly worded and fail to meet the proportionality and necessity standards under international human rights law, opening the door to abuse by authorities. Kenya is also a founding member of the Freedom Online Coalition, a platform for countries committed to protecting freedom of expression and other human rights online. To prevent abuse, Kenyan authorities should ensure oversight by independent judicial authorities of the enforcement of cybercrime laws, so that any restrictions on the right to freedom of expression are lawful, necessary, and proportionate, Human Rights Watch said. “Kenyan authorities should urgently repeal the problematic provisions of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendments) Act, 2025 and ensure that subsequent laws protect, not violate, free expression,” Namwaya said. “Parliament should be transparent when carrying out public consultations and should strive to reflect concerns from civil society, legal experts, and digital rights advocates to ensure that legislation complies with Kenya’s constitutional and international human rights obligations.”.

Read the full article at the original website

References:

Search Results

Bookmarks

Kenya: New Cybercrime Amendments Threaten Online Expression

Search Results

Bookmarks

Subscribe to The Article Feed