Nubian Rights Forum & 2 others v Attorney General & 6 others; Child Welfare Society & 9 others (Interested Parties) [2020] eKLR was also his contention that the Bill should have been referred to the Senate for approval before enactment. 294. Dr. Mogesa further deponed that the impugned amendments have introduced a broad definition of biometrics that differs significantly from that provided in the Data Protection Bill. Additionally, he contended that the amendments will enable the government to obtain from individuals Global Positioning Systems (GPS) coordinates. It was his contention that these amendments will lead to inordinate and arbitrary storage of needless and intrusive confidential information in violation of Article 31 of the Constitution. 295. According to Dr. Mogesa, there are no policy guidelines regulating the management and security of the data. It was his deposition therefore that the implementation of the impugned amendments would subject individuals to grave risk of unauthorized disclosure of confidential personal information, including their location. 296. In his further affidavit, Dr. Mogesa responded to the averments by the 6th Respondent on the issue of public participation by averring that the constitutional principle of public participation presupposes that the public ought to have been engaged in a meaningful and qualitative manner. It was his contention that the said standard was not met. In his view, the advertisement of the amendment Bill in the newspapers by the Respondents was a cosmetic attempt to give the illusion that the public had been accorded an opportunity to participate in its enactment. 297. According to Dr. Mogesa, the Respondents had resorted to threats to counter the opposition to the impugned amendments, and he annexed copies of newspaper excerpts of statements made by government officials to the effect that certain services would not be availed to those without a Huduma Namba, and that there would be no extension of the registration period for the said number. 298. The 3rd Petitioner conceded that it sent a memorandum to the National Assembly on the impugned amendments. It was Dr. Mogesa’s averment, however, that the original Bill that the 3rd Petitioner sent a memorandum on was later substantially changed. He asserted that in any event, the mere fact that the 3rd Petitioner gave its views to Parliament does not mean that these views constituted sufficient or meaningful participation by the public. He annexed a copy of the 3rd Petitioner’s Memorandum on the Statute Law Miscellaneous (Amendments) Bill of 2018 dated 25th May 2018. 299. It was Dr. Mogesa’s averment, however, that the 3rd Petitioner is not against the introduction of NIIMS. Its only concern was that the introduction of NIIMS was not in compliance with the Constitution, and there was no clear legislative framework for protection of the data collected. THE CASES OF THE INTERESTED PARTIES SUPPORTING THE CONSOLIDATED PETITIONS 300. The Interested Parties who supported the Petitions were Muslims for Human Rights, Haki Centre, Law Society of Kenya, and Inform Action, which filed affidavits in support of the Consolidated Petitions. The 3rd Interested Party, Muslim for Human Rights (Muhuri) is a non-profit organization that works on promoting and advancing human and people’s rights for communities in all regions of Kenya. It filed a Replying Affidavit sworn on 24th April, 2019 by Khelef Khalifa, the Chairman of its Board of Directors. 301. On its part, the 4th Interested Party, Haki Centre, is a non-governmental organization that promotes the progressive realization of human rights and active participation in addressing the issues of citizenship and statelessness. It also filed a Replying Affidavit sworn on 8th April 2019 by Phelix Lore, its Executive Director. 302. The 5th Interested Party, Law Society of Kenya, is a statutory corporate body established by section 3 of the Law Society Act, Cap 18 of the Laws of Kenya, and one of its objectives is to assist the government and courts on legislative matters and the administration and practice of law in Kenya. It filed a Replying Affidavit sworn on 14th March, 2019 by its Chief Executive Officer, Mercy Wambua. http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 44/174