On December 5, 2024, a significant blow was dealt to President William Ruto’s directive compelling 34 government institutions to migrate their services to the eCitizen platform, following a ruling by the High Court. The decision, handed down by Justice Bahati Mwamuye, issued a conservatory order suspending the implementation and operation of the directive, effectively pausing its rollout until a full hearing can take place. This suspension was prompted by a challenge from the Katiba Institute, which argued that the directive was illegal and lacked proper public participation.
The controversy centers on the compulsory migration of government services to the eCitizen platform, a digital portal that allows citizens to access and transact with government services online. This move is part of Ruto’s broader strategy to digitize government processes and enhance efficiency in service delivery. However, the Court’s ruling underscores significant concerns regarding the transparency and legality of the directive, with critics arguing that the process lacked adequate stakeholder consultation.
Legal and Public Participation Concerns
The petitioner, Katiba Institute, raised several issues in its application to the High Court. It argued that Ruto’s directive was made without adequate public participation, which is a fundamental requirement under Kenya’s Constitution for decisions that affect the rights and services of citizens. The institute contended that there was insufficient consultation with the public and relevant stakeholders before the directive was issued, which undermines the rule of law and transparency.
Justice Mwamuye’s order highlighted these concerns by suspending the directive and noting that the involved institutions, such as the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education, had not been given a chance to voice their concerns. The court noted that the directive lacked adequate consideration of the digital divide in Kenya, where many citizens, especially in rural areas, lack access to reliable internet and digital payment methods. The Court also pointed out that those without internet access could be vulnerable to exploitation by third-party intermediaries, as they may be forced to rely on others to access government services.
Implications for the Digital Transformation Agenda
President Ruto’s directive was initially aimed at streamlining government operations, reducing bureaucracy, and making services more accessible to the public. By centralizing services through eCitizen, the administration intended to curb corruption and increase transparency by allowing for better tracking of transactions. However, the Court’s decision indicates that these objectives were not well-considered, particularly in terms of accessibility for all citizens.
The suspension also raises questions about the pace and inclusivity of Kenya’s digital transformation agenda. The directive’s suspension highlights the challenges faced by the government in balancing digital transformation with inclusivity, ensuring that the move to digital platforms does not leave behind those who are digitally disadvantaged. The digital divide in Kenya remains a significant issue, with many rural citizens and small businesses still struggling to access essential services online due to inadequate infrastructure and digital literacy.
Calls for Review and Broader Consultation
In response to the ruling, there have been calls for a comprehensive review of the directive and greater consultation with stakeholders. Critics argue that for digital government initiatives to succeed, they must be inclusive and cognizant of the barriers faced by various segments of the population. The Katiba Institute and other advocates for digital rights have urged the government to conduct a thorough assessment of the eCitizen platform’s accessibility and ensure that it meets the needs of all Kenyans.
The suspension of the directive is a reminder of the importance of transparency, public participation, and inclusivity in the rollout of digital government initiatives. As Kenya continues its journey towards becoming a digital-first nation, it will be crucial for the government to engage with the public and stakeholders, consider the challenges faced by the marginalized, and ensure that digital platforms do not create new forms of exclusion.
Conclusion
The suspension of Ruto’s directive by the High Court marks a significant pause in Kenya’s digital transformation journey. It serves as a wake-up call for the government to adopt a more inclusive approach when implementing digital initiatives. As the court prepares to hear the full case, it will be important for the administration to take heed of the criticisms and ensure that future directives do not undermine the rule of law and citizen participation. The path forward must be one that is transparent, inclusive, and carefully considered, ensuring that no Kenyan is left behind in the push for a digital-first government.
