The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner has directed United Winners DT SACCO to pay a complainant after determining that the organization broke the law by disclosing the complainant’s personal information, thereby infringing on the constitutional right to privacy.
In its determination on the complaint by Margaret Nzula, who had accused her ex-employer of disclosing adverse personal information to another SACCO without her consent, the regulator has ruled in favor of the complainant.
According to the determination, the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner has the mandate to ensure that personal data is processed lawfully and that individuals are protected from any abuse of their personal information.
In the determination, which was made on the Data Protection Act of 2019, the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner noted that the complainant, who had filed the case on the 19th of December, 2024, was on probation at the time the personal information was disclosed, thereby losing the job opportunity.
According to the determination, “the Complainant herein lodged a complaint against Respondents, alleging that the 1st Respondent, her former employer, unlawfully disclosed adverse information about her to the 2nd Respondent without her consent while she was on probation.”
The Office noted that the disclosure directly affected her employment prospects.
The complainant further argued that she was denied access to the very information shared about her, compounding the violation.
The decision reaffirmed that “Article 31(c) and (d) of the Constitution of Kenya provides for the right to privacy,” adding that the Data Protection Act was enacted to safeguard such rights.
The regulator highlighted that its role includes “regulating the processing of personal data; ensuring that the processing of personal data of a data subject is guided by the principles set out in Section 25 of the Act; protecting the privacy of individuals.”
Also Read: Nairobi Academy Fined Ksh 637,500 for Publishing Student’s Results Without Consent
In arriving at this conclusion on remedies, the Office was guided by provisions of the Act on compensation for damages resulting from breaches of data.
It was held that: “Section 65 of the Act provides that a person who suffers damage by reason of a contravention of a requirement of the Act is entitled to compensation.”
The ruling was also significant in that it was held that damage was not limited to financial loss.
It was held that damage also included: “damage not involving financial loss, including distress.”
Additionally, regulations on enforcement empower the Commissioner to order compensation for rights breaches.
The Office held that there was a breach of the complainant’s rights by the SACCO. Specifically, there was a breach of the complainant’s right to access their personal data.
It was held that: “The Complainant’s right under Section 26 (b) was infringed upon by the 1st Respondent.”
Also Read: High Court Petition Seeks to Stop Recycling of Mobile Numbers
In its final determination, the Commissioner found the SACCO liable, stating that, “the 1st Respondent is hereby found liable for infringement of the Complainant’s rights right to access under Section 26(b) of the Act.”
The SACCO was further directed to release specific documents to the complainant within two weeks.
“The 1st Respondent is hereby directed to send to the Complainant the requested letters, within 14 (Fourteen) days from the date hereof,” the ruling states.
The Office warned of further action in case of non-compliance, noting that, “in the event of failure to adhere, an Enforcement Notice to issue against the 1st Respondent.”
Ultimately, the Commissioner ordered monetary compensation, ruling that, “the 1st Respondent is hereby ordered to pay the Complainant Kenya Shillings Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand (Ksh 250,000) for the infringement of her rights under the Act.”
Follow our WhatsApp channel for instant news updates

Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi. PHOTO/ Capital FM.