Kenya Case Law

Muchiri & another v Attorney General & 6 others; Selection Panel for Appointment of the Chairperson and Members of the Media Council of Kenya (Interested Party)

Muchiri & another v Attorney General & 6 others; Selection Panel for Appointment of the Chairperson and Members of the Media Council of Kenya (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 8929 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E040 of 2023

Judge

EC Mwita

The court found that the petitioners failed to demonstrate that sections 7 and 14 of the Media Council Act, 2013 were unconstitutional. Section 7(3), which limits nominating organizations for the selection panel to thirteen, was held not to amount to negative discrimination, as a manageable panel size is necessary for effective governance and does not violate Article 27. The court held that the selection process provided for adequate public participation through publication of vacancies and shortlists, and that any qualified person could apply. Allegations of conflict of interest were not sub…

Source excerpt

• Media Regulation
• Public Participation
• Conflict Of Interest
• Judicial Review
• Freedom Of Expression

Nation Media Group Limited & another v Media Council of Kenya Complaints Commission & another

Nation Media Group Limited & another v Media Council of Kenya Complaints Commission & another [2025] KEHC 6996 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E061 of 2025

Judge

RE Aburili

The High Court held that the Media Council Complaints Commission had jurisdiction to hear a complaint alleging false or misleading publication and dismissed judicial review.

• Judicial Review
• Jurisdiction Of Statutory Bodies
• Media Regulation
• Code Of Conduct For Journalists
• False Information Publication
• Judicial-review

Lugalia & another v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Information, Communication and the Digital Economy & 3 others; Kenya Editors Guild (Sued through its President and Secretary Namely Zubediah Kananu Koome & Rosalia Omungo) & 2 others (Interested Parties)

Lugalia & another v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Information, Communication and the Digital Economy & 3 others; Kenya Editors Guild (Sued through its President and Secretary Namely Zubediah Kananu Koome & Rosalia Omungo) & 2 others (Interested Parties) [2025] KEHC 7286 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E367 of 2024

Judge

AB Mwamuye

The Court found that the Petitioners’ exclusion from appointment to the Media Complaints Commission was unlawful, procedurally unfair, and in violation of their constitutional rights. The rejection was communicated by the Principal Secretary, who had no legal authority to do so, rendering the decision ultra vires. The Respondents failed to provide any specific, reasonable grounds for the rejection, nor did they afford the Petitioners an opportunity to be heard or to respond to the adverse findings, breaching the requirements of Article 47(1) and the Fair Administrative Action Act. The process…

Source excerpt

• Fair Administrative Action
• Media Regulation
• Public Appointments
• Legitimate Expectation
• Ultra Vires Actions
• Natural Justice

Kinyanjui v Kenya Films Classifications Board (KFCB) & another

Kinyanjui v Kenya Films Classifications Board (KFCB) & another [2025] KEHC 5814 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Petition E119 of 2024

Judge

LN Mugambi

The Court found that the Films and Stage Plays Act defines 'film' and 'film making' broadly enough to include audio-visual recordings made on smartphones and uploaded to social media. However, the requirement for licensing and prior approval of all such content is impractical, outdated, and unenforceable in the context of modern technology and mass user-generated content. The Court held that while the 1st Respondent retains a statutory mandate to protect the public, especially vulnerable groups, from harmful content, this mandate does not extend to demanding licensing fees for social media up…

Source excerpt

• Freedom Of Expression
• Regulation Of Social Media
• Statutory Interpretation
• Administrative Action
• Media Regulation
• Licensing Of Audio Visual Content

Communications Authority of Kenya v Kenya Union of Journalists & 2 others

Communications Authority of Kenya v Kenya Union of Journalists & 2 others [2025] KECA 670 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Application E715 of 2024

Judges

DK Musinga, M Ngugi, F Tuiyott

The Court of Appeal dismissed a stay application over a judgment striking down parts of KICA and a broadcasting code, finding the appeal arguable but not nugatory.

• Media Regulation
• Broadcasting Code
• Constitutional Supremacy
• Administrative Mandate
• Stay-of-execution
• Broadcasting-regulation

Freytas-Tamura v Maingi & 2 others; Media Council of Kenya (Interested Party)

Freytas-Tamura v Maingi & 2 others; Media Council of Kenya (Interested Party) [2024] KEHC 8380 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E683 of 2023

Judge

JK Ng'arng'ar

The High Court held that the Media Complaints Commission lacked jurisdiction over the appellant because her accreditation as a foreign journalist was not proved.

• Jurisdiction Of Statutory Tribunals
• Accreditation Of Foreign Journalists
• Media Regulation
• Right To Fair Administrative Action
• Jurisdiction
• Media-law

Republic v Chiloba, Director General Communications Authority of Kenya; Katiba Institute & 5 others (Exparte Applicants)

Republic v Chiloba, Director General Communications Authority of Kenya; Katiba Institute & 5 others (Exparte Applicants) [2023] KEHC 23791 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E041 of 2023

Judge

JM Chigiti

The court found that the Communications Authority of Kenya's (CA) decision to censure six TV stations for broadcasting opposition demonstrations was unconstitutional, illegal, and procedurally unfair. The censure was based on Regulation 19(a)-(d) of the Kenya Information and Communications (Broadcasting) Regulations, 2009 and the Programming Code for Broadcasting Services in Kenya, 2019. The court held that Regulation 19(a)-(d) was vague, overbroad, and unconstitutionally limited freedom of expression, media, and information contrary to Articles 33, 34, and 35 of the Constitution. The Program…

Source excerpt

• Freedom Of Expression
• Media Regulation
• Administrative Action
• Statutory Instruments
• Natural Justice
• Proportionality Analysis

Nation Media Group & 2 others v Media Complaints Commission; Ayieko & another (Interested Parties)

Nation Media Group & 2 others v Media Complaints Commission; Ayieko & another (Interested Parties) [2023] KEHC 23732 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review E053 of 2022

Judge

JM Chigiti

The High Court dismissed a judicial review motion against the Media Complaints Commission because it was filed out of time and without leave, making it incompetent.

• Judicial Review Timelines
• Media Regulation
• Right Of Reply
• Fair Administrative Action
• Freedom Of Expression
• Procedural Compliance

Nation Media Group v Media Complaints Commission; Muigai (Interested Party)

Nation Media Group v Media Complaints Commission; Muigai (Interested Party) [2023] KEHC 23663 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E154 of 2021

Judge

JM Chigiti

The court found that the applicant's challenge was in substance an appeal on the merits of the Complaints Commission's decision, rather than a proper judicial review application. The applicant failed to demonstrate any illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety in the respondent's decision-making process. There was no evidence that the respondent misunderstood or misapplied the law, acted unreasonably, or denied procedural fairness. The applicant also did not set out with sufficient precision the alleged constitutional violations. Accordingly, the threshold for granting judicial rev…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Media Regulation
• Freedom Of Expression
• Procedural Fairness

Republic v Media Complaints Commission; Yattani (Interested Party); Nation Media Group & 2 others (Exparte)

Republic v Media Complaints Commission; Yattani (Interested Party); Nation Media Group & 2 others (Exparte) [2023] KEHC 17568 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E056 of 2022

Judge

JM Chigiti

The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenge against the Media Complaints Commission, finding no procedural unfairness, irrationality, or legitimate expectation.

• Judicial Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Legitimate Expectation
• Media Regulation
• Natural Justice
• Judicial-review