Foreign visitors to Kenya will not be required to have the government’s new mandatory travel health insurance cover for now after the High Court in Marsabit suspended the implementation of the policy pending further hearing.
Justice Francis Rayola Olel issued interim orders stopping the operationalisation and enforcement of a Gazette Notice by Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale that requires foreign travellers staying in Kenya for less than 12 months to have inbound travel health insurance with minimum cumulative benefits of US$50,000, equivalent to about Sh6.4 million.
The orders followed a petition filed by two Marsabit residents, businessman Edow Issack Mohammed from El Wak and activist Zhulekha Mohamed Edin, who challenged the legality and implementation of the insurance requirement.
The petitioners argue that the Ministry of Health went beyond its legal powers by introducing the requirement and connecting its enforcement to Kenya’s Electronic Travel Authorisation (eTA) system.
They have also raised questions over whether the government carried out enough public participation before introducing the policy, as well as concerns about the handling and protection of travellers’ personal information.
Justice Olel certified the matter as urgent and directed that the Gazette Notice should not be implemented or enforced until the court hears the application on September 16, 2026.
The disputed notice was published on July 30 and requires foreign visitors planning to remain in Kenya for less than 12 months to obtain inbound travel health insurance meeting specified minimum benefits.
The cover must provide at least US$20,000 for medical expenses and US$25,000 for emergency medical evacuation. It also includes US$300 for prescribed medicines, US$1,000 for mental illness and US$5,000 for the repatriation of mortal remains.
The notice states that “the mandatory inbound travel health insurance shall be provided by insurers approved and licensed under the Insurance Act.”
However, the petitioners say the government has not established a proper legal and administrative structure to support the policy.
They have also questioned the clarity of the policy after the Ministry of Health issued a subsequent clarification allowing travellers to use qualifying insurance policies bought in their countries of origin.
“The Gazette Notice and the subsequent clarification are contradictory,” the petitioners said in an affidavit.
Under the clarification, travellers who already have insurance that meets the required conditions can upload proof through the eTA system. Those without qualifying insurance can instead buy cover at designated entry points after arriving in Kenya.
The petitioners have challenged the role given to immigration officials in checking the insurance documents. They argue that immigration officers do not have the legal authority to authenticate insurance policies because that function falls under the Insurance Regulatory Authority.
They further contend that requiring immigration officials to carry out the checks amounts to an unlawful transfer of responsibilities from one government agency to another.
The residents have also raised concerns about the collection and processing of travellers’ personal information through the eTA system, saying the government has not shown that adequate data protection measures are in place.
They argue that putting the policy into effect would also require changes to the eTA system and the use of additional public resources, without a clear explanation of how the costs involved would be covered.
Following the filing of the case, Justice Olel directed the petitioners to serve the respondents within three days. The government has been given 10 days to respond, while the petitioners will have five days to file a supplementary affidavit.
The respondents named in the case are the Ministry of Interior, the Principal Secretary for Immigration, CS Duale, Principal Secretary for Medical Services Dr Ouma Oluga and the Attorney General.
The Marsabit case is not the only legal challenge facing the insurance requirement. Vantage Point Ventures and the Consumers Federation of Kenya have separately challenged the Gazette Notice, its implementation and the process used to select the insurers.