High Court Halts NTSA Automated Traffic Fines System

By Suleiman Mbatiah

The High Court has temporarily halted the enforcement of the controversial automated traffic fines system, barring the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA) from issuing or enforcing algorithm-generated penalties pending the hearing of a constitutional petition.

The interim orders restrain NTSA and related agencies from issuing, generating, demanding or enforcing instant or automated traffic penalties produced through algorithmic decision-making systems until the court determines the legality of the enforcement framework.

The dispute stems from a public notice issued by NTSA announcing that its Instant Fines Traffic Management System had gone live and would automatically detect traffic violations and send notifications to motorists through SMS.

According to the notice, the process is fully automated and operates without human intervention, with motorists required to settle fines within seven days through the branch network of KCB Group.

Failure to pay the penalties within the prescribed period would result in the fines attracting interest while motorists with outstanding penalties would be blocked from accessing NTSA services such as vehicle registration, licensing and other transactions.

The directive triggered widespread concern among motorists, lawyers and civil society groups, with critics questioning whether the system effectively presumes motorists guilty by requiring payment before any court determination.

Others raised concerns over the use of automated decision-making technologies in criminal enforcement, the lack of transparency in algorithmic processes and the requirement that fines be paid through a commercial bank rather than through judiciary-supervised channels.

The court action follows a constitutional petition filed by Sheria Mtaani and advocate Shadrack Wambui challenging the legality of the automated enforcement system introduced through the NTSA notice.

“The impugned system purports to establish an automated enforcement regime through which traffic offences are detected, determined and penalized through an algorithmic process said to operate without human intervention,” said the petitioners.

The petitioners argue that the automated framework fundamentally alters the criminal justice process governing traffic offences by shifting detection, determination and punishment into an administrative system operating outside established judicial safeguards.

“The Constitution does not permit the imposition of punitive consequences before the determination of criminal liability by a court of law,” The petitioners contend, arguing that the system violates constitutional guarantees of due process.

The petition further raises questions over whether the enforcement model bypasses the constitutional mandate of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which holds exclusive authority to institute criminal proceedings.

Petitioners also argue the automated enforcement system may violate provisions of the Data Protection Act regulating algorithmic decision-making that produces legal consequences for individuals without transparency, safeguards or access to human review.

The case therefore raises broader constitutional questions touching on the right to fair administrative action under Article 47, the right to a fair trial under Article 50 and the independence of the Director of Public Prosecutions under Article 157 of the Constitution.

Justice Bahati Mwamuye issued the conservatory orders at the Milimani High Court, restraining NTSA and related agencies from implementing the automated traffic fines system until the court determines whether the technology violates constitutional rights and due process.

In the orders, the court directed that pending the inter partes hearing and determination of the application, a conservatory order be issued restraining the respondents from issuing, generating, demanding or enforcing instant or automated traffic penalties.

The judge also directed NTSA, the Attorney General and other respondents to file responses to the petition before the matter proceeds to hearing in the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court.

The court further joined KCB Bank Kenya as an interested party in the proceedings following claims that motorists were being directed to pay fines through the bank’s branch network under the automated enforcement system.

Parties have been ordered to comply with filing timelines ahead of a mention scheduled for April 9 when the court will review compliance and give directions on the expedited hearing of the case.

“Parties shall address the court on proposals for the expedited hearing and determination of the matter within ninety days,” Justice Mwamunye directed in the orders.

The High Court will ultimately determine whether Kenya’s automated traffic enforcement framework complies with constitutional safeguards governing due process, administrative fairness and the criminal justice system.