The Kenya Editors’ Guild (KEG) and the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) have strongly condemned the Communications Authority of Kenya’s directive banning live broadcasts of the June 25 protests, calling the move unconstitutional and a direct threat to media freedom and democratic accountability.
Why Are Editors and Lawyers Opposing the Broadcast Ban?
In a statement released Wednesday, KEG President Zubeidah Kananu criticized the Communications Authority’s interpretation of Articles 33 and 34 of the Constitution, calling it “legally and factually flawed.” The articles protect freedom of expression and media freedom, allowing restrictions only in cases involving hate speech, incitement, or propaganda.
“CA’s claim that it is acting under Articles 33 and 34 of the Constitution is legally and factually flawed. These provisions protect free expression, with clear limits only on hate speech, incitement, and propaganda, not on responsible journalism,” said Kananu.
KEG also pointed to a 2023 High Court ruling in Kenya Editors’ Guild & Others v Communications Authority & Others, which barred state interference in live media broadcasts. Kananu warned that ignoring this ruling not only violates the Constitution but also undermines judicial authority.
What Are the Broader Legal and Humanitarian Concerns?
The Law Society of Kenya, the Police Reforms Working Group, and the Kenya Medical Association issued a joint statement warning that the directive threatens constitutional rights and public safety.
“This directive is a misinterpretation of constitutional provisions and a dangerous step towards suppressing fundamental freedoms in Kenya,” the groups said.
They emphasized that live broadcasts play a critical role in preventing the spread of misinformation and holding authorities accountable, particularly during volatile public demonstrations.
The statement also revealed that the blackout is already disrupting emergency medical responses for injured protesters, bystanders, and police officers. The groups argued this amounts to a violation of Article 29 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to security.
“We remind the CA that the media acts as a watchdog… Live broadcasts can deter excessive force and human rights violations by ensuring that actions are witnessed and recorded,” the statement continued.
What Action Could Follow If the Ban Persists?
The legal and civil rights groups have warned the Communications Authority and its Director General David Mugonyi of potential legal consequences. If the directive is not withdrawn by 4 p.m., they plan to initiate legal proceedings. They also cautioned against any move to shut down internet access, which would breach ongoing court conservatory orders.
“We urge national media stations to remain guided by Kenyan law and recent judicial rulings, as well as keep Kenyans informed to prevent atrocities under the cover of a ban,” the statement concluded.
Despite the directive, civil society and media stakeholders continue to emphasize the public’s right to real-time information, especially during moments of national importance like the June 25 protests.
By Risper Akinyi
