The battle to block the government from snooping on mobile phone conversations, read text messages and mobile money transactions is headed to the Supreme Court with the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) joining the case.
Although not an original party in the case, the advocates said that section 4 of the Law Society of Kenya Act, obligates it to uphold the Constitution and advance the rule of law and the administration of justice.
The case was initially filed by activist Okiya Omtatah, and the High Court ruled that the installation of Device Management System (DMS) by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA), which would allow the agency to access information of three leading mobile operators, was a breach to privacy and consumer rights.
However, the CA appealed and in April, a bench of three judges quashed Justice John Mativo’s judgment stating that the development of DMS was at its architectural stage and the case premature.
In the appeal to the Supreme Court, LSK has faulted the Court of Appeal judges for wrongly interpreting the law to dispose of the case. The lawyers say public participation, as argued by Mr Omtatah is a national value and principle of governance binds all State organs, State officers and public officers and all persons whenever any of them applies.
Further, LSK said public participation applies to all aspects of governance and a public officer and or entity charged with the performance of a particular duty bears the onus of ensuring and facilitating public participation.
The LSK said the appellate court ignored pleadings, evidence and submissions as to why the petition was not hypothetical.
“LSK asserts that the Court of Appeal arrived at ‘a decision not anchored on evidence’ and drew conclusions “so perverse that no reasonable tribunal would arrive at them,” the appeal reads.
The LSK and Omtatah maintain that DMS would herald an error of public control and eavesdropping of peoples’ privacy by intercepting and recording of communication and mobile data.
The CA had argued that the installation was meant to fight counterfeits through the creation of an Equipment Identification Register, which will detect all devices, isolate the illegal ones and deny fake ones, services.
Mr Omtatah said the government had failed to justify the need for eavesdropping on private calls and that the claim of identifying counterfeit devices was a ploy to spy on calls, text messages and money transactions.
Trouble started on January 31, 2017, when CA wrote Safaricom, Airtel and Orange-Telkom Kenya to allow Broadband Communications Services Ltd to tap into their computers.
PAYE Tax Calculator
Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.
