Court Halts Mandatory Health Cover for Foreign Visitors

Justice Francis Rayola Olel issued the interim orders after two local residents challenged a Gazette Notice issued by Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale. The suspension remains in place pending a full hearing scheduled for mid-September.

Under the contested notice, travellers planning to stay in the country for less than one year would have needed inbound medical cover with a minimum cumulative benefit of US$50,000. The policy was required to include specific provisions such as US$20,000 for medical expenses and US$25,000 for emergency evacuation. Enforcement was to be linked to the Electronic Travel Authorisation system.

The petitioners, businessman Edow Issack Mohammed and activist Zhulekha Mohamed Edin, argue that the Ministry of Health exceeded its legal powers and failed to ensure adequate public participation. They also raised concerns about data privacy, the absence of a clear administrative framework, and contradictions between the original notice and a later clarification allowing travellers to use qualifying policies bought in their home countries. “The Gazette Notice and the subsequent clarification are contradictory,” they stated in their affidavit.

Further objections focus on the role assigned to Immigration officials, whom the petitioners say lack the mandate to verify insurance documents—a function they argue belongs to the Insurance Regulatory Authority. They contend that transferring such duties between agencies without proper legal basis is unlawful and that the changes would require unbudgeted modifications to existing systems.

The court directed the petitioners to serve the respondents promptly and set timelines for the government’s response. Similar legal challenges have already been filed by other parties, underscoring wider questions about the scheme’s legality and practicality. For now, the mandatory insurance requirement cannot be enforced while the case proceeds.