The High Court has ordered the government to disclose details of a US-backed Ebola quarantine and treatment plan amid concerns about Kenya's ability to contain a potential outbreak of the disease and protect public health.
The court issued the orders after the State failed to file responses or attend court in a case challenging the government's decision to host American nationals exposed to or infected with Ebola under a deal with the United States.
While extending orders blocking implementation of the decision, the court demanded full disclosure of the agreement to both the public and the petitioner, Katiba Institute.
The judge directed the Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale to disclose the details within seven days, piling pressure on officials to explain an arrangement that has sparked concerns over public health, transparency and constitutional oversight.
According to the court order, the Ministry of Health is expected to disclose full terms of any agreement entered with the US, memorandum or negotiations relating to the quarantine facility, including whether the arrangement received approval from Parliament, regulators or county authorities.
The ministry is also required to furnish the public with all public health, environmental, biosafety and security assessments as well as the protocols that would govern the admission, isolation, handling and treatment of Ebola-exposed persons.
The case proceedings attracted intense public interest, with 359 people attending the virtual court session, underscoring the national concern generated by President William Ruto’s administration's decision to host a facility for Americans exposed to or infected with the deadly disease.
Reports indicated that the facility would initially have 50 beds and could later be expanded to 250. The proposed site is at a military installation in Laikipia County.
The conservatory orders require the government to stop the establishment of any Ebola quarantine, isolation or treatment facility in Kenya. The court also barred the admission of Ebola-exposed persons under the contested programme.
At the same time, the court consolidated a separate petition filed by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) with the earlier case lodged by Katiba Institute and allowed the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and the Laikipia County government to join the proceedings as interested parties.
The matter will be mentioned on June 23 to confirm compliance with the disclosure orders and to take highlighting directions.
The legal dispute has rapidly evolved into one of the most significant public interest cases in recent years, bringing together constitutional questions on executive power, treaty-making, public participation, public health preparedness and access to information.
Both petitions are challenging establishment of the US-operated Ebola quarantine and treatment facility intended for American nationals exposed to the virus during the ongoing outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo and neighbouring countries.
The petitioners argue that the arrangement was negotiated secretly and implemented without public participation, parliamentary approval, environmental assessments or biosafety clearances.
In its petition, Katiba Institute accused the government of attempting to convert Kenya into “an offshore quarantine centre for foreign states” and argued that citizens had been denied information about the nature and scope of the arrangement.
LSK raised similar objections but broadened the challenge to include the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cabinet Secretary for Foreign Affairs, arguing that any international arrangement involving the transfer of Ebola-exposed or infected persons into Kenya required constitutional and parliamentary scrutiny.
The lawyers' body told the court that the arrangement threatened rights to life, health, dignity and a clean environment and violated constitutional requirements on transparency and accountability.
LSK also argued that no evidence had been provided showing compliance with the Public Health Act, environmental laws, biosafety regulations or the International Health Regulations governing cross-border disease management.
It said the government had not published any public health risk assessment, environmental impact assessment or biosafety review despite the proposed facility involving one of the world's deadliest infectious diseases.
In court filings, LSK said the United States is establishing the facility in Kenya while at the same time restricting entry into its own territory for travellers arriving from outbreak zones.
The society argued that Kenya lacked a Level Four high-containment biosafety laboratory and had limited experience handling active Ebola cases at scale.
It warned that the proposed facility could expose health workers, neighbouring communities and the wider public to the risk of accidental transmission.
Katiba Institute similarly contends that the State failed to disclose the agreement's terms, biosafety safeguards, operational protocols and emergency response measures.
The case gained further prominence after the United States confirmed discussions between President William Ruto and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Ebola preparedness and announced plans to commit $13.5 million (Sh1.7 billion) towards Kenya's Ebola preparedness efforts. Washington also said it had already committed $112 million (Sh14.4 billion) to the broader regional response.
The government has since acknowledged discussions with international partners on Ebola preparedness but has not publicly released details of any agreement relating to the proposed facility.
