Law Society of Kenya Seeks Substantive Party Status in Supreme Court Appeal Challenging Key Provisions of Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act
Quote from Lawyer on May 14, 2026, 5:37 amThe Law Society of Kenya has filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking recognition as a substantive party in the ongoing appeal concerning the constitutionality of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act. The lawyers body argues that its active participation is essential to protect public interest and uphold constitutional freedoms in the digital environment.
According to court documents, the LSK was among the original petitioners who challenged the law at the High Court in 2018. It invoked its mandate under the Law Society of Kenya Act to defend rights and freedoms. However, on December 3, 2018, the High Court ordered the closure of its separate case file and merged it with a petition by the Bloggers Association of Kenya. This decision reduced the LSK's standing to that of an interested party.
The society maintains that the reclassification was not voluntary and has unfairly limited its role in litigation that it independently initiated. It emphasizes that it did not enter the proceedings as a spectator but in fulfillment of its statutory obligations and in defense of broader public interest.
The LSK warns that its current limited status could prevent full participation in the Supreme Court appeal. Concerns reportedly arose from the court registry regarding its appeal filing while listed merely as an interested party. Such an interpretation, the society argues, would unjustly deny it a proper hearing before the apex court despite its central involvement from the beginning.
In the Court of Appeal, the LSK participated as a respondent alongside other parties contesting various provisions of the cybercrimes law. In a judgment delivered in March 2026, the appellate court struck down Sections 22 and 23 of the Act. These sections had criminalized the publication of false or misleading information online. The judges ruled the provisions unconstitutional, noting that their vagueness and broad discretion could suppress satire, opinions, journalism, and legitimate public discourse.
At the same time, the Court of Appeal upheld other parts of the law addressing cyber harassment, unauthorized system interference, unlawful interception of data, and the sharing of intimate images. The bench reasoned that these measures were necessary to protect users from abuse and prevent cyberspace from becoming a lawless environment without appropriate criminal sanctions.
Several parties have since appealed aspects of the appellate decision to the Supreme Court. These include the Bloggers Association of Kenya, Article 19 East Africa, and the Kenya Union of Journalists. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, under DPP Renson Ingonga, has also challenged the entire judgment.
The LSK continues to express concerns that certain remaining sections of the Act threaten freedom of expression, media freedom, and access to information as guaranteed under Article 33 of the Constitution. It particularly highlights Section 14, which it says could criminalize whistleblowers, bloggers, researchers, journalists, and digital activists for handling or publishing leaked information of public interest, including evidence of corruption. The society stresses that the law must not be used as a weapon against those disseminating information in the public interest.
The Supreme Court has certified the LSK application as urgent. It has directed the society's lawyer, Dudley Ochiel, to serve all parties within seven days. The matter is scheduled for mention before the registrar on May 21 for further directions on hearing the application.
The Law Society of Kenya has filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking recognition as a substantive party in the ongoing appeal concerning the constitutionality of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act. The lawyers body argues that its active participation is essential to protect public interest and uphold constitutional freedoms in the digital environment.
According to court documents, the LSK was among the original petitioners who challenged the law at the High Court in 2018. It invoked its mandate under the Law Society of Kenya Act to defend rights and freedoms. However, on December 3, 2018, the High Court ordered the closure of its separate case file and merged it with a petition by the Bloggers Association of Kenya. This decision reduced the LSK's standing to that of an interested party.
The society maintains that the reclassification was not voluntary and has unfairly limited its role in litigation that it independently initiated. It emphasizes that it did not enter the proceedings as a spectator but in fulfillment of its statutory obligations and in defense of broader public interest.
The LSK warns that its current limited status could prevent full participation in the Supreme Court appeal. Concerns reportedly arose from the court registry regarding its appeal filing while listed merely as an interested party. Such an interpretation, the society argues, would unjustly deny it a proper hearing before the apex court despite its central involvement from the beginning.
In the Court of Appeal, the LSK participated as a respondent alongside other parties contesting various provisions of the cybercrimes law. In a judgment delivered in March 2026, the appellate court struck down Sections 22 and 23 of the Act. These sections had criminalized the publication of false or misleading information online. The judges ruled the provisions unconstitutional, noting that their vagueness and broad discretion could suppress satire, opinions, journalism, and legitimate public discourse.
At the same time, the Court of Appeal upheld other parts of the law addressing cyber harassment, unauthorized system interference, unlawful interception of data, and the sharing of intimate images. The bench reasoned that these measures were necessary to protect users from abuse and prevent cyberspace from becoming a lawless environment without appropriate criminal sanctions.
Several parties have since appealed aspects of the appellate decision to the Supreme Court. These include the Bloggers Association of Kenya, Article 19 East Africa, and the Kenya Union of Journalists. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, under DPP Renson Ingonga, has also challenged the entire judgment.
The LSK continues to express concerns that certain remaining sections of the Act threaten freedom of expression, media freedom, and access to information as guaranteed under Article 33 of the Constitution. It particularly highlights Section 14, which it says could criminalize whistleblowers, bloggers, researchers, journalists, and digital activists for handling or publishing leaked information of public interest, including evidence of corruption. The society stresses that the law must not be used as a weapon against those disseminating information in the public interest.
The Supreme Court has certified the LSK application as urgent. It has directed the society's lawyer, Dudley Ochiel, to serve all parties within seven days. The matter is scheduled for mention before the registrar on May 21 for further directions on hearing the application.