Abdullahi Bashir Sheikh & 24 others v Kenya National Bureau of Statistics & 4 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Garissa
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Justice C. Kariuki
Judgment Date
October 28, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3

Case Brief: Abdullahi Bashir Sheikh & 24 others v Kenya National Bureau of Statistics & 4 others [2020] eKLR


1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Hon Abdullahi Bashir Sheikh & 24 Others v. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics & 4 Others
- Case Number: Petition No. 4 of 2020 (as consolidated with NRB HC PET. 102, 103, 106, 107, 110, 111 of 2020 & Garissa PET. 3 of 2020)
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Garissa
- Date Delivered: 28th October 2020
- Category of Law: Constitutional and Human Rights Law
- Judge(s): Justice C. Kariuki
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues presented before the court include:
1. Whether the orders granted by the court on 29th June 2020 were the orders sought by the petitioners.
2. Whether the court has jurisdiction to review its orders based on claims that the data sought for scrutiny does not exist in the manner envisaged by the court orders.
3. Whether enforcing the orders would infringe on the right to privacy as protected under the Constitution and relevant statutes.

3. Facts of the Case:
The petitioners, led by Hon Abdullahi Bashir Sheikh, sought access to data collected during the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census in specific sub-counties. They alleged that the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (1st Respondent) had failed to provide accurate census data, which affected the distribution of national revenue. The 1st Respondent contended that the court's orders for data access infringed on individual privacy rights and that the devices used for data collection had been disposed of and reconfigured, making compliance with the orders impossible.

4. Procedural History:
The case began with the petitioners filing an application for interim orders on 29th June 2020. The court issued orders allowing the petitioners' IT experts to access the 1st Respondent's central server and devices used for data collection. Subsequently, the 1st Respondent filed an application on 13th July 2020, seeking to review and set aside the court's orders, claiming they were not the ones sought and that compliance would violate privacy rights. The petitioners opposed this application, asserting it was a tactic to delay scrutiny of the census data.

5. Analysis:
Rules:
The court considered various legal provisions, including:
- Article 31 of the Kenyan Constitution regarding the right to privacy.
- Section 6(1)(d) & (i) of the Access to Information Act concerning access to information without infringing on privacy.
- Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which govern applications for review.

Case Law:
The court referenced several prior cases to inform its decision, including:
- Raila Amolo Odinga & 2 Others v. Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 2 Others (2017), which discussed the limits of judicial discretion.
- Muyodi vs. Industrial and Commercial Development Corporation & Another (2006), defining errors apparent on the face of the record.
These cases underscored the importance of adhering to procedural rules and the necessity to demonstrate valid grounds for review.

Application:
The court found that the 1st Respondent had not established sufficient grounds for review. It ruled that the orders made on 29th June 2020 were indeed reflective of the petitioners' requests. The court emphasized that issues of privacy had already been considered and determined in the earlier ruling, and the 1st Respondent's claims of data disposal were unconvincing, as they had not adequately communicated the unavailability of devices during the proceedings.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the 1st Respondent's application for review, reaffirming its previous orders. The ruling highlighted the need for transparency in the census process and reinforced the principle that privacy rights must be balanced against public accountability.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the decision, as the ruling was unanimous.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya upheld its initial orders allowing the petitioners access to census data, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in the census process. The court dismissed the 1st Respondent's application for review, underscoring that privacy concerns had been adequately addressed and that the claims regarding the disposal of data collection devices lacked merit. This case sets a significant precedent regarding the balance between data privacy and the public's right to access information for accountability purposes.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Abdullahi-Bashir-Sheikh--24-others-v-Kenya-National-Bureau-of-Statistics--4-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2711_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries