How CyberCrimes Act is being used to stifle political opponents

Photo Courtesy: Mwabili Mwagodi

After seven months of silence since his July 2025 abduction, political activist Mwabili Mwagodi hit the media headlines again this week. His court arraignment, followed two days later by the full acquittal of university student David Oaga Mokaya, shines a stronger spotlight on the misuse of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act and an international instrument, Interpol’s Red Notice system, to stifle political expression.

Mwabili dramatically burst into national consciousness when he was dumped at the border by persons suspect to be acting for the Tanzanian authorities in July 2025. To date, neither Kenya nor Tanzania governments have held anyone accountable for the unlawful kidnapping and forceful cross-border transfer of the diasporan hotelier who had been working in Dar es Salaam.

Last Sunday, Kenyan immigration officers on the Lunga Lunga border told him a Red Notice had been placed on his passport, blocked his travel, and handed him over to police to await transfer to Nairobi by a DCI team coming from Nairobi. After three tedious days in custody, Mwagodi was charged with publishing false information and is currently out on personal bond, while officers search his gadgets for evidence.

His recent detention raises serious concerns about violations to his constitutional right to liberty, freedom of movement, and protection from arbitrary arrest. A Red Notice had been placed on his passport in January 2025, six months before his abduction and forced return. This may be the strongest indication his forceful return was coordinated by Kenya and Tanzania authorities. Secondly, his claim that he neither knew he was under investigation nor was barred from travel is deeply troubling. Thirdly, why use Nairobi based DCI officers to effect arrest like in the case of the late Albert Ojwang’. Do we not have competent officers or courts in Kwale or Mombasa County?

The use of the INTERPOL Red Notice deserves equal attention. Established in 1923, INTERPOL introduced the Red Notice system to track World War II criminals and strengthen cross-border law enforcement. As law enforcement agencies digitized, Red Notices, flags placed against suspects’ names in immigration databases, became routine for states to track and arrest serious criminals.

Several studies have demonstrated how this important crime management tool has been weoponised by Russia, China, Türkiye and other authoritarian states. Used against human rights defenders, political exiles and even business rivals, it has damaged reputations, triggered arrests and extended cross-border repression. Unchecked, Red Notices have destroyed many people’s lives long before a judge hears their cases.

Under the INTERPOL Constitution, aggrieved individuals can request a copy of their files and complain to the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL files. Like US and EU legislative bodies, parliamentarians can introduce stronger safeguards to prevent abuse, arbitrary arrest and detention. All Red Notices must be based on an arrest warrant and a judicial order. As Mwabili’s court case unfolds, his trial may reveal more about the behavior of our investigators and the abuse of state power to intimidate those, powerful people feel, are their political opponents.

Two days after Mwabili’s arraignment, the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act was in the dock again. Magistrate Carolyne Mugo’s ruling in the David Oaga Mokaya case was damning. Investigators violated multiple constitutional provisions, the Data Protection Act and other laws by obtaining his phone number, call records and data from Safaricom without court orders. They also failed to prove he personally created the digitally altered image of President Ruto in a coffin. Mugo has urged the police to follow the law even when senior officials are the subjects of online criticism. The University student’s acquittal drives another nail into the credibility of Kenya's Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act.

Combined with Citizen Lab’s recent report on the use of Cellebrite to extract data from presidential aspirant Boniface Mwangi’s phone last July, the two cases show how deeply unlawful surveillance has taken root. These developments should prompt DCI into a serious reflection against using intrusive and unlawful tactics to monitor citizens and curb political expression. Let’s see.

This opinion was also published in the Saturday Standard, 21 February 2026.