Griffins Abuora is a student at the Kenya School of Law and lives in Kisumu, where he reports on legal, political and human rights developments in Kenya for JURIST.
On April 24, the Kenyan Court of Appeal, sitting in Malindi, handed down a landmark ruling that will permanently reshape the country’s abortion jurisprudence hold that abortion is not a fundamental constitutional right. The three-judge bench comprising Justices Gatembu Kairu, Grace Ngenye Macharia and Kibaya Laibuta admitted consolidated appeals, which were heard on March 6Th October 2025, overthrow of a controversial Supreme Court Decision dated 24Th March 2022.
The dispute stems from the High Court case PAK and another against Attorney General and three otherswhere the court had found that access to abortion falls within constitutional protections, particularly the right to health, dignity and freedom from cruel treatment. That ruling was based on a sensitive issue involving a teenager who suffered pregnancy complications and received emergency care after the abortion, which led to the arrest of a minor — referred to by initials in court documents — and a broader constitutional challenge. The Supreme Court’s position effectively expanded reproductive rights and directed the state to develop a clearer legal and policy framework.
However, dissatisfied parties, including the Kenya Christian Professionals Forum, the state law firm and others, filed suit Appealson the grounds that the Supreme Court had made a misinterpretation Article 26 the constitution. They argued that life begins at conception and that abortion can only be justified in narrowly defined exceptional cases.
In its April 24 decision, the appeals court adopted this narrow interpretation. The judges emphasized that Article 26 paragraphs 1 and 2 protect the right to life from conception and that abortion fundamentally violates this right. They clarified that abortion is only permitted in certain circumstances: when, in the opinion of a trained medical professional, emergency treatment is required, the life or health of the mother is in danger, or another written law permits it. By overturning the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Court of Appeal restored a stricter constitutional and statutory framework, including the continued relevance of the provisions of the Criminal Code criminalizing unlawful abortions.
The verdict sparked strong and immediate reactions across Kenya. Religious and conservative groups hailed the decision as an affirmation of the sanctity of life, while human rights organizations and medical professionals criticized it as a setback for reproductive health rights. Advocacy groups including the Center for Reproductive Rights have already signaled plans to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court, warning that the ruling could jeopardize access to emergency care and increase stigma around reproductive health services.
Public reactions were deeply divided social media This reflects a polarized national debate between moral, legal and health policy perspectives. Some Kenyans view the ruling as constitutional, while others view it as regressive, particularly given data linking unsafe abortions to maternal mortality.
The implications are profound. Legally, the decision limits the scope of reproductive rights and reaffirms judicial respect for the constitutional text against broad interpretation. In practice, this puts healthcare providers under greater scrutiny and can discourage women from seeking urgent medical care. Politically and socially, it sets the stage for a likely showdown in the Supreme Court and ensures that the issue of abortion rights in Kenya remains unresolved and hotly contested.
The opinions expressed in JURIST Dispatches are solely those of our local correspondents and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST editors, staff, donors or the University of Pittsburgh.
