High Court Blocks Withdrawal of Petition Challenging Ruto Health Data Deal With US
High Court Blocks Withdrawal of Petition Challenging Ruto Health Data Deal With US
High Court Blocks Withdrawal of Petition Challenging Ruto Health Data Deal With US
The High Court has rejected an attempt by the Consumer Federation of Kenya to withdraw a constitutional petition challenging the controversial health data-sharing agreement between Kenya and the United States.
Justice Nyaundi Patricia Mande upheld an objection by the Katiba Institute, ruling that the petition must proceed to a full hearing. The Consumer Federation had informed the court that it had reached a consent agreement with the government and therefore sought to discontinue the case.
Katiba Institute opposed the withdrawal application, arguing that constitutional violations cannot be settled through private agreements when alleged breaches remain unresolved. The institute maintained that no consent can be given to constitutional violations and that the issues raised in the petition persisted despite any proposed agreement between the Consumer Federation and the government.
Katiba further argued that the case was filed in the public interest and does not belong exclusively to the Consumer Federation, meaning any member of the public has the legal right to continue prosecuting it. Justice Nyaundi agreed with this position, holding that courts must retain control over constitutional petitions filed in the public interest and may decline withdrawal applications where doing so serves the public good.
The judge stated that allowing such cases to be withdrawn by consent could undermine constitutional accountability and weaken public-interest litigation.
The court also noted that Senator Okiya Omtatah had expressed willingness to pursue the petition alongside his own related case. As a result, the consolidated petitions will proceed and are scheduled for a hearing on May 25, 2026, before Justice Nyaundi.
The five-year health cooperation framework was signed in Washington in December 2025 and commits the United States to providing up to one point six billion dollars between 2026 and 2030. The funds are mainly earmarked for HIV and AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria prevention, maternal and child health, and outbreak surveillance and response.
The agreement has drawn sharp criticism. The Consumer Federation argued that the deal contravenes Kenya’s Data Protection Act, Digital Health Act, and Health Act, and that new data regulations are needed to protect citizens’ health information. Senator Omtatah petitioned the court to halt the agreement on grounds that it undermines public participation and parliamentary oversight while binding Kenya to terms that could strain the national budget.
Under the government-to-government model, the United States will channel health funding directly through Kenyan government systems rather than through non-governmental organizations and external implementing partners. However, Kenya is expected to increase both national and county health budgets annually as part of the agreement.
The High Court had previously suspended implementation of the memorandum of understanding following separate court challenges by the Consumer Federation and Senator Omtatah. The court had stated that the petitions raised arguable constitutional and legal issues and warned that implementation could cause irreversible constitutional harm before the cases are decided.
