AG Oduor Fights to Unfreeze Cybercrimes Act as Government Cites 201% Surge in Cyber Threats

The battle over the future of digital expression and security in Kenya reached a critical point in the High Court this week.

On November 5, 2025, Attorney General Dorcas Agik Oduor, alongside a contingent of senators and MPs, lodged a high-stakes petition urging the High Court to lift the conservatory orders that have suspended key sections of the new 2024 Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act amendments. These amendments, signed into law by President William Ruto on October 15, have been met with intense scrutiny and legal challenges.

The Government’s Justification: Escalating Threats

The government’s primary argument for reinstating the controversial provisions—which criminalize acts like false publications, cyber harassment, and unauthorized access—is rooted in alarming cybersecurity data.

The state contends that a crippling 201.7% increase in cyber threats was recorded in early 2025, amounting to a staggering total of 2.54 billion incidents. This surge, they argue, necessitates immediate, robust legal mechanisms to protect citizens and critical infrastructure from digital harm.

The penalties under the targeted sections are severe, including up to 10 years in prison or fines reaching Sh20 million, signaling the government’s intent to treat digital crimes with extreme punitive force.

The Civil Society Counter-Argument: Unconstitutional Vagueness

Standing against the state are a group of civil society petitioners, notably musician and activist Reuben Kigame and the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC).

Their challenge asserts that the suspended sections are unconstitutional because their terms—such as what constitutes “false publication” or “cyber harassment”—are dangerously vague and overly broad. Petitioners warn that the law grants the government excessive power to arbitrarily target critics, journalists, and activists, thereby creating a “chilling effect” on free speech and privacy guaranteed under the Constitution.

With six different petitions consolidated into one major case, the High Court has recognized the gravity of the legal and constitutional questions at hand. The temporary suspension of the contentious provisions remains in place until Thursday, when the court is set to proceed with further hearings.

This case sets up a critical confrontation that will define the boundary between national digital security and individual online freedoms in Kenya for years to come.