SHA building / /FILEA doctor has moved to the High Court in Vihiga seeking the suspension of an alleged 2 per cent HIMS System Utilisation fee said to be deducted from claims submitted by healthcare providers through the Social Health Authority (SHA) system.
Dr Magare Gikenyi Benjamin, together with litigant Eliud Karanja Matindi and Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah, are challenging the claimed deduction and have raised questions over its legal basis, transparency and implementation.
In their petition, the applicants allege that a 2 per cent HIMS System Utilisation fee is deducted from the amount claimed by healthcare providers.
Dr Magare claims he first noticed the deduction on April 8, 2026, while carrying out his work as a surgeon at an office in one of the authority’s accredited facilities.
The petitioners have raised concerns over the basis for the deduction and whether there is legislation or statutory authority providing for the fee.
They allege that they have not been provided with an explanation setting out the legal basis of the charge or the role of the Digital Health Authority, which they identify as one of the entities they believe may be connected to the fee.
On July 1, 2026, Dr Magare says he wrote to the relevant officials seeking clarification on the matter.
According to the petition, the requested legal basis had not been provided by the time the applicants moved to court.
The petitioners further allege that there is no legislation or statutory authority specifically authorising the deduction of the alleged 2 per cent fee from healthcare providers’ claims.
They have also raised questions about how the money is accounted for and the purpose for which it is collected.
“There is no clear road map where the 2% HIMS System Utilisation fee goes and how it's budgeted and appropriated,” the petition states.
The applicants have also questioned whether there was public participation before the alleged fee was introduced.
They argue that the absence of such participation raises concerns about the process through which the fee was introduced and implemented.
The petitioners further raise concerns over the principles governing the management and use of public funds, arguing that the alleged deduction should be subjected to appropriate legal and accountability requirements.
"That currently , Kenya’s economy is struggling, and as a result, the same has caused a lot of financial strain and pushed taxation beyond the majority of Kenyans," the court filings add.
They have cited Articles 209 and 210 of the Constitution, among other provisions, in challenging what they describe as the legal framework surrounding the alleged charge.
The applicants are seeking conservatory orders suspending any decision, circular, gazette notice or other instrument authorising the deduction of the alleged 2 per cent HIMS System Utilisation fee from healthcare providers’ claims.
They also want the court to suspend the charging or levying of the alleged fee pending the hearing and determination of the application and petition.
In addition, the petitioners want the respondents prohibited from implementing or giving effect to any decision or document authorising the deduction.
The application asks the court to certify the matter as urgent and hear it on a priority basis.
The petitioners argue that the issue requires urgent consideration in order to prevent what they describe as the continued deduction of money from healthcare claims before the court determines the legality of the practice.
They have also asked the court to set strict timelines for the filing of responses and submissions to facilitate an expedited determination of the case.
