By Jehoshaphat Kanyoro Njaro
A legal battle is brewing over the recent ban on Muguka trade and consumption in three Kenyan counties.
Businessmen Peter Odhiambo Agoro and Michael Mutembe Makarina have filed a petition against Mombasa, Kilifi, and Taita Taveta counties, challenging their authority to enforce such prohibitions.
Last week, the three counties implemented a comprehensive ban on the entry, sale, and use of Muguka, a variety of the Miraa plant, citing health concerns and addiction issues, especially among the youth.
Mombasa Governor Abdulswammad Nassir emphasized the adverse health impacts, including mental health problems and addiction, as key reasons for the ban. He noted that the decision followed consultations with the National Authority for the Campaign Against Drug Abuse (NACADA).
Similarly, Kilifi Governor Gideon Mung’aro highlighted the negative effects on young people, describing Muguka as a threat to the younger generation.
However, the petitioners argue that Muguka is legally recognized in Kenya and not classified as a narcotic by NACADA. They assert that the Miraa regulations of 2021 acknowledge both Miraa and Muguka as legitimate crops.
“There is no law separating Miraa from Muguka, and no single law prohibits its sale or consumption,” they claim.
Agoro and Makarina further contend that the counties acted beyond their legal authority by imposing the bans without proper public participation and legislative backing.
They argue that only the national parliament can declare a substance narcotic or psychotropic through legislation. They are calling on the court to declare the bans illegal and unconstitutional and to restrain the counties from enforcing them.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the regulation of Muguka and similar substances in Kenya, potentially setting a precedent for how local and national authorities manage such issues in the future.