Kenya’s Public Health Act, Cap 242, is an outdated piece of legislation that remains heavily focused on diseases that no longer pose a significant threat, such as smallpox, leprosy, sexually transmitted infections, and the plague. Enacted in 1921 and amended multiple times, most recently in 2012, it has failed to evolve in response to modern public health challenges. While it was a necessary tool in its time, the Act is now a colonial relic that no longer addresses the realities of contemporary health crises.
In the 21st century, Kenya has faced numerous public health challenges that have tested its health systems, including outbreaks of infectious diseases such as avian flu, swine flu, Rift Valley fever, cholera, measles, and more recently, COVID-19 and Mpox. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed significant weaknesses in Kenya’s health infrastructure, and the country’s response highlighted the need for more modern, effective public health laws. Despite successfully managing the pandemic relative to other regions, much of Kenya’s success was attributed to factors unrelated to the public health measures themselves. Lessons learned from the pandemic must be incorporated into future health strategies to ensure better preparedness for future outbreaks.
One of the key issues with the Public Health Act is its outdated methods of disease notification. The Act still relies on telegrams, a communication method from a bygone era, to notify authorities about certain notifiable conditions. Additionally, the Act focuses on diseases that are no longer an immediate concern, while modern threats like emerging infectious diseases are not adequately addressed. The recent COVID-19 response, for example, highlighted gaps in the Act, particularly in the implementation of quarantine measures, which were not properly coordinated with county governments, leaving them to shoulder the financial burden.
Moreover, the Act needs to be aligned with the Constitution of Kenya 2010 to strike a balance between individual rights and public health. Public health laws must clearly define when public interest overrides individual rights, especially in life-and-death situations, to avoid human rights violations. The Act also needs to reflect advancements in healthcare technologies that make disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation more efficient and less intrusive. This includes embracing the one-health approach, which integrates human, animal, and environmental health to address emerging diseases.
Another critical area for reform is the regulation of public health infrastructure, such as healthcare facilities, hospitality services, and building construction. The current system is marred by overlapping enforcement and unnecessary licensure requirements, which increase costs for businesses and discourage compliance. Simplifying these regulations would foster better cooperation among stakeholders in the public health sector.
Additionally, Kenya’s public health departments, particularly at the county level, are chronically underfunded. They rely heavily on donor funding, which is not a sustainable solution. Health budgets need to be increased to ensure that public health departments can operate effectively and provide the necessary services to the population.
As Kenya moves forward, the country cannot afford to implement modern health initiatives, such as the Digital Health Act, based on an outdated Public Health Act. The legal framework must be overhauled to address contemporary health challenges, embrace technological advancements, and ensure that public health systems are adequately funded and equipped to protect the population from future health crises.
