Kenya’s Digital Privacy Under Threat

A controversial bill currently before Kenya's National Assembly is igniting a firestorm of debate over potential state surveillance and infringement on digital privacy. 

The Kenya Information Communications Act (Amendment) Bill, 2025, spearheaded by Aldai MP Marianne Kitany, seeks to grant expansive monitoring powers to government authorities, raising serious concerns about internet freedom, data security, and fundamental civil liberties. The core of the controversy lies in the Bill's provisions requiring internet service providers (ISPs) and telecommunication firms to implement advanced tracking mechanisms. These include "meter billing systems" assigning unique identifiers to each subscriber, coupled with specialised tools for monitoring and logging user activity accessible at the government's discretion. 

All SIM-card retailers would also be subject to these stringent requirements.

Critics argue the proposed amendments constitute a significant erosion of constitutionally protected privacy rights. Immediate former Attorney General Justin Muturi and constitutional lawyer David Ochami have both voiced strong opposition, asserting the Bill clashes with existing legal frameworks, notably the Data Protection Act. They specifically warn that granting authorities access to personal digital signatures would establish an unprecedented surveillance capability, enabling officials to track and potentially intercept communications without adequate oversight.

Adding to the apprehension is the timing of the legislation. Reports suggest the government has already acquired and implemented surveillance technology, with the Bill serving as a legal instrument to legitimise its use. Anonymous sources within the ICT Ministry and security agencies have confirmed the operational status of these monitoring tools, hinting at a deliberate intent to formalise broad snooping powers under the guise of regulation.

Beyond privacy concerns, the Bill's mandated obligations for ISPs could disproportionately affect smaller providers. Empowering larger technology and broadcast firms to monitor competitors raises alarms about potential anti-competitive practices and government-enabled corporate espionage. The requirement for ISPs to submit annual detailed billing information further exacerbates fears of comprehensive state surveillance, providing authorities with extensive records of internet users.

Another contentious aspect involves new licensing regulations for SIM-card holders and broadcasting entities. The proposed framework would render existing licenses void, necessitating fresh applications subject to criteria determined by the Information Cabinet Secretary. Critics argue this discretionary power could be wielded arbitrarily, potentially leading to political and economic ramifications through denial of licenses.

Legal experts have characterised the Bill as a regressive step that undermines Kenya's progress in digital freedom and democratic governance. Muturi has accused President William Ruto’s administration of seeking greater control over communication channels, warning that the amendments could undo constitutional protections. Ochami echoes these sentiments, cautioning that mandatory registration of digital signatures could facilitate state-led tracking and interception of online communications.