Nine years after Kenya won international praise for becoming one of the few countries to outlaw shisha, the country’s tobacco control agenda finds itself at a crossroads. This week, the High Court declared the continued enforcement of the 2017 shisha ban unlawful after the government failed to regularize the regulations within a court-ordered timeline, exposing legal and administrative gaps rather than questioning the health risks associated with tobacco.
The ruling has reignited debate over whether Kenya is losing momentum in a fight once regarded as a model for the region. From landmark court victories defending graphic health warnings and other tobacco control regulations to delayed legislative reforms and a fresh push to prohibit shisha through new rules, the country’s anti-tobacco campaign has become increasingly entangled in legal battles, policy delays and industry resistance.
As Parliament considers amendments to strengthen tobacco laws, health advocates warn that the collapse of the shisha ban is more than a legal setback, it is a test of whether Kenya can sustain decades of progress against one of the world’s leading preventable causes of death.
Building on the court ruling, tobacco control advocates argue that the collapse of the shisha ban is symptomatic of deeper institutional challenges rather than an isolated legal setback. According to Joel Gitali, Chairman of the Kenya Tobacco Control Alliance (KETCA), the handling of the ban reflects broader weaknesses in the country’s tobacco control system, where policies are often undermined by weak implementation and inconsistent enforcement.
Gitali says Kenya has made notable progress over the years, but maintaining those gains requires stronger legal frameworks instead of relying on administrative directives. He argues that the proposed Tobacco Control (Amendment) Bill, 2024 offers an opportunity to close existing loopholes by bringing emerging nicotine products, including shisha and oral nicotine pouches, under the law.
“If enacted, the legislation would provide courts with a firmer legal basis to uphold tobacco control measures while reducing the likelihood of future policy reversals arising from procedural weaknesses,” he says.
For Gitali, failure to strengthen the law could reverse years of progress in reducing tobacco use, particularly among young people. With new nicotine products increasingly entering the market.
“Kenya risks higher rates of addiction and a growing burden of non-communicable diseases, including cancer and cardiovascular illnesses.” He notes.
Beyond the health implications, he says the economic costs associated with treating preventable diseases and the resulting loss of productivity could place additional strain on the country’s healthcare system and broader economy.
For Thomas Lindi, the National Coordinator of KETCA, the court ruling should not be misconstrued as an endorsement of shisha use or a rejection of the scientific evidence supporting its regulation. Instead, he says, the judgment was limited to the legal validity of the regulations used to enforce the 2017 ban.
“The High Court’s decision is undoubtedly a setback for tobacco control in Kenya, but it should not be interpreted as a rejection of the public health rationale for regulating shisha,” he says.
According to Lindi, when the government prohibited shisha in 2017, the decision was backed by overwhelming evidence linking waterpipe smoking to exposure to toxic chemicals, nicotine, carcinogens and carbon monoxide, all of which increase the risk of addiction, cancer, cardiovascular disease and respiratory illnesses.
“The growing popularity of shisha, particularly among young people, had raised fears of reversing years of progress in reducing tobacco use.” Lindi notes
For him, the ruling exposes weaknesses in regulatory governance rather than flaws in Kenya’s tobacco control policy.
“The Court did not conclude that shisha is safe, the decision concerned legal process rather than public health evidence,” Lindi says, adding that future tobacco control measures will require stronger legal drafting, closer coordination among state institutions and timely regulatory reviews to withstand legal scrutiny.
Beyond the legal and policy debate, KETCA says the ruling also presents a communication challenge, particularly among young people who may misunderstand its implications. Speaking to People Daily, Cecilia Lubanga, the alliance’s Public Health Advocate and Youth Ambassador, warns that the judgment should not be mistaken for proof that shisha is safe.
“The court’s ruling should not be interpreted as an endorsement of shisha or a declaration that it is safe,” she says, noting that the scientific evidence on the health risks of shisha remains unchanged.
According to Lubanga, misconceptions surrounding the ruling could encourage experimentation among young people, who are often targeted through marketing that portrays shisha as fashionable or less harmful than cigarettes.
“We cannot allow years of progress in protecting young people from tobacco harms to be undermined by misconceptions surrounding this ruling,” she says, calling for sustained public awareness campaigns and stronger efforts to protect youth from nicotine addiction.
“We cannot allow years of progress in protecting young people from tobacco harms to be undermined by misconceptions surrounding this ruling”
— Cecilia Lubanga, Public Health Advocate and Youth Ambassador at KETCA