The National Assembly has introduced the Computer Misuse and Cybercrime (Amendment) Bill, 2024, a proposal that has reignited debate over digital freedoms and potential government overreach.
Published on August 9, 2024, the Private Members’ Bill, sponsored by Aden Daudi Mohamed, seeks to amend the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018, with new provisions expanding state control over online platforms.
One of the most contentious proposals, under Clause 3, grants the National Computer and Cybercrimes Coordination Committee (NC4) the authority to restrict access to websites and applications.
The clause proposes to amend Section 6 of the 2018 Act, allowing NC4 to “issue a directive to render the website or application inaccessible” if it is found to “promote illegal activities, child pornography, terrorism, or extreme religious and cultic practices.”
Critics argue that the vague wording of the provision could lead to arbitrary censorship and suppression of dissenting voices.
Read More
The bill comes at a time when concerns over digital rights in Kenya are heightened.
The government previously blocked Telegram in November 2023 and temporarily disrupted internet access in June 2024, moves that were widely condemned as attempts to stifle political activism.
The latest proposal echoes a similar amendment introduced in 2021, which was later withdrawn following public opposition.
Legal experts warn that the proposed legislation could undermine constitutional rights to freedom of expression, privacy, and political participation.
The phrase “where it is proved” lacks clarity, as it remains uncertain who determines the burden of proof or whether there will be judicial oversight over NC4’s decisions.
Additionally, there is no specified duration for how long a website or application can remain blocked.
Critics argue that this loophole could be exploited to impose indefinite restrictions, particularly in politically sensitive periods such as elections and protests.
The bill also introduces new offences, including an expanded definition of cyber harassment, an extension of phishing-related crimes, and the criminalisation of unauthorised SIM swaps.
While these provisions aim to enhance cybersecurity, stakeholders argue that the overall impact of the bill could be detrimental to Kenya’s digital landscape.
Economically, the legislation could impose heavy costs on the country’s digital sector. Enforcing restrictions would require significant resources, increasing compliance costs for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and technology firms.
The recent blocking of Telegram, for instance, is estimated to have cost Kenya approximately USD 27.02 million (Sh4.2 billion)
Furthermore, Kenya’s June 2024 internet shutdown had ripple effects across neighbouring Burundi, Rwanda, and Uganda, disrupting businesses and financial services.
Kenya now risks joining nations such as Russia, China, India, the UAE, and Turkey, which have used similar laws to justify digital authoritarianism.
The move could also affect Kenya’s standing as Africa’s Silicon Savannah, potentially reducing its attractiveness as a hub for ICT investment.
Global civil society organisations have warned that such measures contribute to declining internet freedom rankings and deteriorating democratic governance.
While combating crimes such as terrorism and child exploitation is a legitimate concern, digital rights activists insist that any law restricting online spaces must meet international human rights standards.
Measures must be “necessary, proportionate and provided by law,” with judicial oversight to prevent abuse.
KICTANet, a member of the #KeepItOn Coalition, has raised alarm over the bill’s potential to accelerate digital repression in Kenya.
With civil society mobilising against the proposal, the fate of the amendment remains uncertain.
However, the bill’s introduction signals the government’s continued push for greater control over the digital space, a move that could have far-reaching implications for online freedoms in Kenya.
