Omtatah: Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Amendment Act 2024 was poorly drafted
By Joel Masibo, October 22, 2025Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah has faulted the new Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, signed into law by President William Ruto on Wednesday, October 15, 2025, for lack of clarity.
Speaking in a local radio interview on Wednesday, October 22, 2025, the legislator noted that the particular act was hurriedly drafted, displaying a lot of vagueness, even as a petition has been filed against its implementation.
The new law introduces changes meant to address emerging threats, such as cyber fraud, digital terrorism, identity theft, and harmful online content, positioning Kenya among African nations that are taking a firm stand against the misuse of technology.
”The new Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, introduces vague concepts that can be abused to curtail freedoms. The bill was poorly drafted. If I were to fault it, I would fault it on the issue of vagueness,” Senator Omtatah said.
”It also brings in the concept of inappropriate sexual content of a minor. Is there any appropriate sexual content of a minor? There is none! What is it trying to justify?” Omatatah posed.
Petition filed
The particular Amendment Act has attracted public outrage, with a section of Kenyans accusing the Head of State of taking advantage of former Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s mourning period to sneak in the controversial Bill. In his statement on Tuesday, October 21, 2025, gospel musician Reuben Kigame confirmed that he has joined forces with the Kenya Human Rights Commission to contest in court against the recently signed bill into law by the Head of State.
“On behalf of the great people of Kenya, the Kenya Human Rights Commission and I have filed a petition in the High Court under Certificate of Urgency, challenging the recently signed Computer Misuse and Cyber Crimes Bill, hurriedly and secretly signed by the President into law on 15/10/2025,” Kigame said.
According to Reuben Kigame and the KHRC, the signed law contravenes the Constitution and undermines and dilutes the carefully established provisions of the Data Protection Act.
“The impugned amendment introduces provisions that are unconstitutional and create a direct conflict with the Data Protection Act (DPA),” the petitioner states. The Criminalisation of ‘False, Misleading, and Mischievous’ Information: This vague and overbroad offence chills freedom of expression and lacks the precision required by law,” the petitioners said.