The World Health Organisation has come out to explain its advisory against closure of borders amid fears of the spread of ebola in Kenya.
WHO Country Representative in Kenya Dr Neema Rusibamayila Kimambo revealed on Wednesday, October 14 that the global health body was against the closure of borders as it could potentially heighten the risk of unscreened individuals entering the country.
According to Dr Neema, closure of borders would eventually push travellers towards unofficial crossing points and make it harder for health officials to identify and screen people at risk.
“Our borders are very porous. If we close the borders, people will use unofficial borders, and you will not be able to screen,” she said during a High-Level Media Engagement and National Outbreak Reporting Workshop.
Dr. Neema Kimambo during her tenure in Malawi as the WHO Malawi Country Representative.
Photo
WHO Malawi
The WHO official maintained that if the borders remained open, it would be easier for the Ministry of Health to identify suspected infections and respond quickly without unnecessarily disrupting economic activities.
Further, WHO argued that keeping official entry points operational would give health officials a better opportunity to identify people who may have been exposed to an infectious disease while allowing other economic activities to continue without any panic.
She added, “Better use official borders so that you can do the screening and pick up those at risk,” she said, explaining why WHO considers blanket border closures counterproductive.
Kenya's Ebola Preparedness
The first Ebola case was confirmed on October 6 2026, when a Kenyan citizen, who had been living in the Democratic Republic of Congo, tested positive. The patient travelled by road through Uganda before arriving in Nairobi on 3 October, was admitted to hospital and later died on 5 October.
At the time, questions were raised about how an infected traveller crossed several borders before the infection was confirmed.
In the wake of the Ebola case, WHO advised countries against imposing travel and trade restrictions on affected countries, particularly when such measures are not supported by evidence.
Instead, WHO's guidance emphasises surveillance, rapid identification and testing of suspected cases. These measures, according to WHO, are meant to detect infections early and prevent further transmission without necessarily disrupting travel.
Following confirmation of the imported case, the Ministry of Health has since intensified surveillance, screening and contact tracing to establish whether infections has spread to other people.
By October 6, more than 652,000 travellers had been screened while 267 suspected samples had been tested.
Part of the Ministry's response also included identifying isolation units in 27 high-risk counties and strengthening preparedness among health workers.
The Bundibugyo (Ebola) virus disease spreads through direct contact with the blood or other body fluids of an infected person, or with contaminated materials.
There is currently no approved vaccine or specific treatment for the disease, making early detection, infection prevention and appropriate supportive care particularly crucial.
Meanwhile, Laikipia County Executive Committee Member for Health Albert Taiti confirmed that two suspected Ebola cases tested negative, easing concerns after reports of possible infections in Nanyuki.
A photo collage of the main entrance of the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) and a sign of Ebola, October 6, 2026.
Photo
Kenyans.co.ke