Nubian Rights Forum & 2 others v Attorney General & 6 others; Child Welfare Society & 9 others (Interested Parties) [2020] eKLR 333. Dr. Kibicho contended that by implementing NIIMS, the government is joining the global trend of adopting technology in service delivery. Further, that the implementation is in actualization of Kenya’s commitment to the African Union regarding digitization, harmonization and integration of systems to promote efficiency in service delivery. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents contended that the government has spent a lot of money, time and other resources in actualizing NIIMS. It was their case that the government had successfully completed the pilot phase and intended to roll out the mass registration in the month of March 2019. 334. Dr. Kibicho denied that the government intended to collect DNA and GPS coordinates from citizens as alleged by the Petitioners. He averred that the data collection form had no provision for collection of DNA and GPS information, and that in any event, Kenya does not currently have the capacity to collect DNA information from all Kenyans. As regards GPS, it was his averment that the government’s intention is to know the place of residence of each Kenyan. However, it does not intend to keep surveillance on their movements as alleged by the Petitioners. In his view, NIIMS is intended to protect individuals’ rights to privacy by ensuring that all their personal identification information is secured in the custody of one government entity. 335. It was also his averment that Kenya has a robust series of statutes and policy on data protection, information security, modalities of access to information and protection of privacy of the integrity of government records and information. In his view, NIIMS has not introduced major changes to the information to be obtained from Kenyans. Instead, it has sought to update the government’s method of collection and storage of information to take advantage of current technology for efficiency purposes. 336. Dr. Kibicho stated that the impugned amendments were subjected to meaningful and qualitative public participation in line with Article 118(1)(b) of the Constitution and had met the threshold thereunder. He detailed the enactment process of the impugned amendments to buttress his averment and contended that members of the public and requisite stakeholders were given sufficient notice and adequate opportunity to participate in the consideration of the issues in the Bill. It was also his contention that members of the National Assembly, being the duly elected representatives of the people of Kenya, effectively represented the citizenry in the consideration and passage of the amendments. He had also personally sensitized members of the public on NIIMS through various public fora and media in his official capacity. 337. Dr. Kibicho averred that the impugned amendments were not substantive in nature as the personal information required for registration under NIIMS is essentially similar to the personal information required for registration under the registration systems which were already in existence before the amendments. 338. Regarding the failure to submit the Bill to the Senate, Dr. Kibicho deposed that the matters covered by the impugned amendments relate to national population registration, which is not a devolved function and is squarely within the mandate of the National Government. To the Petitioners averments that there were other Bills pending in Parliament on the same issue as the impugned amendments, Dr. Kibicho responded that the intended purposes of the National Registration and Identification Bill, 2012 and the Registration and Identification of Persons Bill, 2014 which have in any event since stalled in Parliament, are effectively achieved by the impugned amendments. 339. In response to the concerns raised by the Petitioners with respect to the procurement of NIIMS, Dr. Kibicho stated that the procurement of the hardware components of the NIIMS registration kits was conducted in strict compliance with the Constitution and procurement laws. Further, that owing to the sensitivity of NIIMS, its software component was developed internally by several government agencies under the stewardship of the Ministry of Information Communication and Technology and no foreign entity was involved, or will have access to the information collected by NIIMS. 340. The Petitioners contention that NIIMS will entrench discriminatory practices was denied. Dr. Kibicho averred that on the contrary, NIIMS will ensure universal coverage for individuals from birth to death, thereby eliminating http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 49/174