Waziri Mayai Wa Maradhi
Senior Member
- Jan 28, 2026
- 175
- 59
Three individuals from Kenya have lodged a constitutional appeal at the High Court aimed at halting the application and enforcement of halal certification insignias on meat products, contending that the system functions without a definitive legal basis and poses issues for both consumers and businesses.
The appellants — Dennis Nthumbi, Dennis Owuor Ochanda, and Henry Barasa Tom — are requesting the court to declare the existing halal certification framework illegal unless it is expressly supported by legislation.
Under the banner of urgency, the case claims that halal certification in Kenya is predominantly overseen by private organizations, yet has become intricately woven into the meat supply chain, affecting processes from slaughterhouses to retail venues and determining market access.
The petition asserts that the widespread usage of halal labels presents significant consumer protection dilemmas, especially concerning transparency, pricing, and the right to accurate information. The petitioners contend that numerous consumers lack awareness of what the certification truly involves or whether its related expenses are reflected in increased prices.
Moreover, they argue that meat inspection and public health regulation are regulatory responsibilities assigned to governmental bodies and ought not to be delegated or swayed by private certifying organizations. The petition cautions that the growing influence of such entities poses a risk of causing regulatory ambiguity and diminishing accountability within the food industry.
In their petition, the trio is also requesting momentary orders to prevent regulators and state agencies from implementing or allowing any meat certification system that lacks legal foundation.
Furthermore, they seek to compel the appropriate government entities to reveal the legal framework, standards, and cost structure that regulate halal certification in Kenya’s meat sector.
While the petitioners stress that they do not challenge religious dietary customs, they assert that their case centers on legality, transparency, and proper regulation of certification marks utilized in the food sector.
The appellants — Dennis Nthumbi, Dennis Owuor Ochanda, and Henry Barasa Tom — are requesting the court to declare the existing halal certification framework illegal unless it is expressly supported by legislation.
Under the banner of urgency, the case claims that halal certification in Kenya is predominantly overseen by private organizations, yet has become intricately woven into the meat supply chain, affecting processes from slaughterhouses to retail venues and determining market access.
The petition asserts that the widespread usage of halal labels presents significant consumer protection dilemmas, especially concerning transparency, pricing, and the right to accurate information. The petitioners contend that numerous consumers lack awareness of what the certification truly involves or whether its related expenses are reflected in increased prices.
Moreover, they argue that meat inspection and public health regulation are regulatory responsibilities assigned to governmental bodies and ought not to be delegated or swayed by private certifying organizations. The petition cautions that the growing influence of such entities poses a risk of causing regulatory ambiguity and diminishing accountability within the food industry.
In their petition, the trio is also requesting momentary orders to prevent regulators and state agencies from implementing or allowing any meat certification system that lacks legal foundation.
Furthermore, they seek to compel the appropriate government entities to reveal the legal framework, standards, and cost structure that regulate halal certification in Kenya’s meat sector.
While the petitioners stress that they do not challenge religious dietary customs, they assert that their case centers on legality, transparency, and proper regulation of certification marks utilized in the food sector.
