The High Court has struck out a petition challenging the rollout of the Social Health Insurance Fund (SHIF), citing the existence of ongoing related cases before other courts, in a ruling seen as a relief for the government amid rising opposition to the new healthcare model.

Justice Chacha Mwita ruled that the petition filed by four doctors, led by Doctor Clarence Eboso Mweresa, could not proceed because the issues raised were already pending before the Court of Appeal and in Petition E513 of 2024 at the High Court.

“The issues raised in this petition are already pending before the Court of Appeal and in Petition E513 of 2024. Proceeding to determine them now would risk conflicting decisions and render this court’s findings academic. For that reason, the petition is struck out,” said Justice Mwita.

The petitioners had asked the court to declare the mandatory registration and contribution to SHIF unconstitutional, arguing that the Social Health Insurance Act (SHIA) violated rights to privacy, equality, and property.

They also objected to the 2.75 percent deduction from gross income for all Kenyans and the automatic transfer of data from the defunct NHIF without consent.

Justice Mwita said addressing the issues in the petition would amount to interfering with Civil Appeal No. E565 of 2024, where the Court of Appeal is examining the constitutionality of SHIA and its implementation.

Another petition—E513 of 2024—also before the High Court, challenges the legality of the SHIF regulations.

“Consequently, and for the above reasons, this petition is struck out. As this is public interest litigation, each party shall bear their own costs,” he ruled.

Although the judge did not make a final determination on the constitutionality of the deductions, he noted that collecting 2.75 percent from gross income after income tax amounts to double taxation.

“In that regard, by providing that a person contributes 2.75 percent of his/her gross income to the Fund after paying income tax from the same gross income, the regulation introduces a negative element of taxation, which is double taxation and would, as a result, make such a regulation unlawful. However, since the issue of the legality of the regulations is pending in petition E513 of 2024, I will not say more on the issue,” he said.

The ruling temporarily shields the government from legal setbacks as it pushes ahead with implementing the SHIF, even as the Court of Appeal considers a separate case in which a High Court ruling found SHIA and related laws unconstitutional for lack of public participation.