Court of Appeal deserves criticism over decision on Kenya-US health deal case

Audio By Vocalize

The recent decision of the Court of Appeal to suspend the High Court order that had blocked the implementation of the Kenya-US health cooperation framework raises old and uncomfortable questions about the place and role of courts in the constitutional order. The issue goes beyond this agreement. It speaks to a growing pattern where the appellate court lifts conservatory orders once the State claims that government operations are under threat. Over time, this approach has weakened constitutional litigation and turned urgent public cases into known-end rituals with little practical value.

Conservatory orders exist for a simple reason. They preserve a disputed situation until courts determine whether the challenged action is lawful. They prevent irreversible actions. Without them, the State can move quickly, spend public funds, sign agreements, transfer information, restructure institutions, and create facts on the ground before judges finally pronounce themselves. When that happens, the eventual judgment becomes symbolic. The Constitution may still speak through the court, but the injury has already occurred, and what is more?

That is why the Court of Appeal deserves criticism, and I take this early chance to do so in this piece. The court increasingly appears persuaded by the argument that any interruption of government activity automatically threatens public interest. This understanding of public interest is narrow and dangerous. Government action is not automatically lawful merely because it comes from the government. Some actions violate the Constitution. Some bypass Parliament. Some ignore public participation. Some create risks around sovereignty, debt, or privacy. Courts exist precisely to pause power when such questions arise. The equaling of anything the government does to be in the public interest is the basis of the sin.

In this dispute, Senator Okiya Omtatah raised serious constitutional concerns. He questioned whether the framework amounted to an international agreement requiring parliamentary approval under Article 2(6) of the Constitution. He challenged the adequacy of public participation. Concerns were also raised about data protection and the transfer of health information to foreign entities. These issues cannot even prima facie be said to be baseless, even by virtue of the strict data transfer framework outside the country under sections 48 to 50 of the Data Protection Act.

The Court of Appeal, however, treated the suspension of the framework as a threat to public welfare. The government argued that the freeze had created a functional vacuum in the health sector during a period of high disease transmission. The judges accepted this logic and lifted the conservatory order pending a later detailed ruling. This reasoning assumes that government inconvenience always outweighs constitutional imperatives and inviolable demands. That assumption is becoming routine in many public interest litigation disputes.

One wonders what purpose conservatory orders now serve if they can be suspended whenever the State invokes urgency, economic disruption, or even just administrative inconvenience. In public law litigation, timing matters greatly. Once agreements are implemented, money disbursed, systems operationalised or data shared, reversal becomes difficult. Courts may later find constitutional violations, but the practical consequences remain untouched. Litigants then win arguments after losing in reality. Appeals survive on paper while the disputed action proceeds without restraint. As constitutional scholar Joshua Malidzo argues, the constitution bleeds without recourse in such times in the hands of the very protectors, the courts.

This trend appears entrenched lately. Conservatory orders issued by the High Court after careful consideration are quickly challenged before the Court of Appeal, which often intervenes in favour of the State. The message gradually emerging is disturbing. The government can proceed first and answer constitutional questions later. Such an approach weakens Article 23 remedies and reduces constitutional safeguards to temporary suggestions for the State. Even worse, the Court of Appeal treats those applications with a curious urgency; abridged rulings are always ready just to facilitate the State before the detailed ruling is out. Just as it is in this case.

The deeper problem lies in how Kenyan courts understand public interest. Public interest is often reduced to the uninterrupted functioning of government. If stopping a programme delays procurement, interrupts policy, courts quickly declare the interruption harmful to the public. The Constitution itself is the highest expression of public interest. It is part of governance. It is our lifeline.

There is irony here. Courts frequently speak about transformative constitutionalism, accountability, and the rule of law. However, in politically significant disputes, many judges retreat into administrative pragmatism. The concern shifts from legality to continuity. The judiciary begins sounding less like a constitutional guardian and more like an adviser concerned with ‘smooth administration’. A judiciary that constantly rescues the executive from constitutional pauses slowly becomes an extension of executive power. It may still produce sound decisions, but its practical effect favours the State. A zero-sum game.

I do not argue that all conservatory orders are beyond reach. But constitutional adjudication requires suspicion of unchecked power and never just automatic sympathy for the State with no compelling justification. The burden should remain on the government to demonstrate why immediate implementation outweighs the risk of constitutional harm.

Our Constitution was designed to restrain power through institutions, procedure, and participation. Conservatory orders form part of that architecture. Decisions like this shape the culture of governance and the character of the judiciary. Courts must decide whether they exist to ease the path of government or to discipline power through law. Is the Court of Appeal back to being the executive court as we knew it?

.std-banner-wrap {
max-width: 100%;
width: 100%;
position: relative;
margin: 2.5rem 0 2rem;
font-family: Georgia, ‘Times New Roman’, serif;
}

.std-top-rule {
display: flex;
height: 4px;
}

.std-top-rule .r1 {
background: #CC0000;
flex: 3;
}

.std-top-rule .r2 {
background: #C9A84C;
flex: 1;
}

.std-top-rule .r3 {
background: #0D0D0D;
flex: 6;
}

.std-banner {
background: #F9F5F0;
padding: 2rem 2.2rem 1.8rem;
position: relative;
overflow: hidden;
box-shadow: 0 4px 24px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.10), 0 1px 0 #C9A84C;
border-left: 4px solid #CC0000;
}

.std-banner::before {
content: ‘S’;
position: absolute;
right: -1rem;
top: -2rem;
font-family: Georgia, serif;
font-size: 14rem;
font-weight: 900;
color: rgba(204, 0, 0, 0.04);
line-height: 1;
pointer-events: none;
user-select: none;
}

.std-eyebrow {
display: inline-flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 0.5rem;
font-size: 0.62rem;
font-weight: 700;
letter-spacing: 0.2em;
text-transform: uppercase;
color: #CC0000;
margin-bottom: 0.85rem;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
}

.std-eyebrow::before {
content: ”;
display: block;
width: 18px;
height: 1.5px;
background: #CC0000;
}

.std-banner-title {
font-family: Georgia, ‘Times New Roman’, serif;
font-size: clamp(1.3rem, 3.5vw, 1.75rem);
font-weight: 900;
color: #0D0D0D;
line-height: 1.2;
margin: 0 0 0.75rem;
letter-spacing: -0.02em;
}

.std-banner-title .std-hl {
color: #CC0000;
font-style: italic;
}

.std-divider {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 0.6rem;
margin-bottom: 0.9rem;
}

.std-divider::before,
.std-divider::after {
content: ”;
flex: 1;
height: 1px;
background: #d8d0c6;
}

.std-divider-dot {
width: 6px;
height: 6px;
border-radius: 50%;
background: #CC0000;
flex-shrink: 0;
}

.std-banner-body {
font-size: 0.97rem;
line-height: 1.7;
color: #2C2C2C;
font-weight: 400;
margin: 0 0 1.4rem;
font-family: Georgia, serif;
}

.std-banner-body strong {
font-weight: 700;
color: #0D0D0D;
}

.std-cta-row {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 1rem;
flex-wrap: wrap;
margin-bottom: 1.2rem;
}

.std-btn-subscribe {
display: inline-flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 0.6rem;
background: #CC0000;
color: #fff !important;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 0.8rem;
font-weight: 700;
letter-spacing: 0.1em;
text-transform: uppercase;
padding: 0.72rem 1.5rem 0.72rem 1.3rem;
border: none;
cursor: pointer;
text-decoration: none !important;
border-bottom: none !important;
position: relative;
overflow: hidden;
transition: background 0.2s ease, transform 0.15s ease, box-shadow 0.2s ease;
box-shadow: 0 4px 16px rgba(204, 0, 0, 0.3);
clip-path: polygon(0 0, calc(100% – 10px) 0, 100% 50%, calc(100% – 10px) 100%, 0 100%);
padding-right: 1.8rem;
}

.std-btn-subscribe:hover,
.std-btn-subscribe:focus,
.std-btn-subscribe:visited,
.std-btn-subscribe:active {
background: #A00000 !important;
color: #fff !important;
transform: translateY(-1px);
box-shadow: 0 6px 22px rgba(204, 0, 0, 0.4);
text-decoration: none !important;
border-bottom: none !important;
outline: none;
}

.std-btn-subscribe:active {
transform: translateY(0);
}

.std-btn-arrow {
display: inline-block;
font-size: 1rem;
line-height: 1;
transition: transform 0.18s ease;
}

.std-btn-subscribe:hover .std-btn-arrow {
transform: translateX(3px);
}

.std-dismiss {
font-size: 0.75rem;
color: #999;
background: none;
border: none;
border-bottom: 1px dashed #ccc;
padding: 0 0 1px;
cursor: pointer;
font-family: Georgia, serif;
letter-spacing: 0.03em;
transition: color 0.2s;
}

.std-dismiss:hover {
color: #333;
border-bottom-color: #333;
}

/* Payment logos */
.std-payment-row {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 0.45rem;
flex-wrap: wrap;
padding-top: 1rem;
border-top: 1px solid #e0d9d0;
margin-bottom: 0.7rem;
}

.std-pay-label {
font-size: 0.6rem;
color: #aaa;
letter-spacing: 0.14em;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
margin-right: 0.2rem;
white-space: nowrap;
}

.std-pay-badge {
display: inline-flex;
align-items: center;
justify-content: center;
height: 24px;
padding: 0 0.5rem;
border-radius: 3px;
border: 1px solid #e0d7ce;
background: #fff;
box-shadow: 0 1px 3px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.05);
}

/* M-Pesa */
.std-mpesa-text {
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 0.7rem;
font-weight: 900;
}

.std-mpesa-m {
color: #39b74a;
}

.std-mpesa-dash {
color: #db3939;
}

.std-mpesa-p {
color: #39b74a;
}

/* Visa */
.std-visa-text {
font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, Times, serif;
font-size: 0.82rem;
font-weight: 900;
font-style: italic;
color: #1a1f71;
letter-spacing: -0.03em;
}

/* Mastercard */
.std-mc-wrap {
position: relative;
width: 28px;
height: 16px;
}

.std-mc-left {
width: 16px;
height: 16px;
border-radius: 50%;
background: #eb001b;
position: absolute;
left: 0;
top: 0;
}

.std-mc-right {
width: 16px;
height: 16px;
border-radius: 50%;
background: #f79e1b;
position: absolute;
right: 0;
top: 0;
mix-blend-mode: multiply;
}

/* Airtel Money */
.std-airtel-text {
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 0.64rem;
font-weight: 800;
}

.std-airtel-a {
color: #ec2427;
;
}

.std-airtel-m {
color: #dd3436;
font-weight: 600;
}

/* Equitel */
.std-equitel-text {
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 0.6rem;
font-weight: 700;
color: #003087;
letter-spacing: 0.02em;
}

.std-equitel-eq {
color: #e2001a;
}

/* Trust strip */
.std-trust-strip {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
gap: 0.45rem;
flex-wrap: wrap;
}

.std-trust-strip .std-shield {
width: 11px;
height: 11px;
fill: #C9A84C;
flex-shrink: 0;
}

.std-trust-strip span {
font-size: 0.67rem;
color: #aaa;
letter-spacing: 0.03em;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
}

.std-trust-strip .std-dot {
width: 3px;
height: 3px;
border-radius: 50%;
background: #ccc;
flex-shrink: 0;
}

/* Bottom rule */
.std-bottom-rule {
height: 2px;
background: linear-gradient(to right, #C9A84C, #CC0000, #0D0D0D);
}

/* Entrance animation */
@keyframes stdSlideUp {
from {
opacity: 0;
transform: translateY(20px);
}

to {
opacity: 1;
transform: translateY(0);
}
}

.std-banner-wrap {
animation: stdSlideUp 0.5s cubic-bezier(0.22, 1, 0.36, 1) both;
}

Support Independent Journalism

Stand With Bold Journalism.
Stand With The Standard.

Journalism can’t be free because the truth demands investment.
At The Standard, we invest time, courage and skills to bring you accurate,
factual and impactful stories. Subscribe today and stand with us in the
pursuit of credible journalism.

Continue
→

Pay via

Secure Payment

Kenya’s most trusted newsroom since 1902

Follow The Standard on