Wamuzi News Ke
In a dramatic turn of events, Cabinet Secretary for ICT and Digital Economy William Kabogo has confirmed that the government deliberately ordered live media coverage to be switched off during the Gen Z protests on June 25—a move he says was imperative for national security but which critics slam as an assault on press freedom.
“Protecting the Public” vs. Suppressing Dissent
During a media briefing earlier today, CS Kabogo offered a rare public defense of what many describe as a draconian measure. He argued that the decision was taken “within the parameters of existing security laws” to prevent the dissemination of “potentially inflammatory content” during the youth-led Gen Z demonstrations. “The safety of citizens was our primary concern,” Kabogo asserted, reiterating that the shutdown was temporary and narrowly targeted.
Media Outrage and Legal Alarms
The announcement reignited deep-seated concerns among media houses, journalists, and civil rights groups. Media Council of Kenya chairperson, in an official statement, condemned the action as “a blatant attempt to gag the press” and warned that such executive overreach risks undermining Kenya’s hard-won democratic traditions.
Constitutional experts also sounded alarms. “Even during emergencies, resorting to shutting down media is disproportionate and dangerous,” said a legal analyst seeking anonymity. “It bypasses checks and balances and sets a perilous precedent for future crackdowns.”
Gen Z Protests: Catalyst for Clampdown
The June 25 demonstrations, spearheaded by Gen Z activists demanding better governance and accountability, triggered unease among authorities following reports of street clashes and attempts to blockade key infrastructure. Kabogo defended the clampdown as a precaution to avert widespread unrest: “We intervened when coverage risked inciting violence.”
However, opposition leaders argue that the move amounted to political censorship. Wiper Party’s Kalonzo Musyoka accused the government of weaponizing state powers to stifle dissent and intimidate a generation rallying for reform.
Political Polarization Intensifies
The controversy deepens existing rifts in Kenyan politics. On one side, the ruling administration claims the blackout was a lawful security intervention; on the other, opponents argue it was a calculated effort to marginalize voices of dissent and control narrative. The issue has already been politicized in Parliament—with MPs questioning not only the decision-making authority but also the lack of prior judicial oversight.
What’s Next: Legal Challenge on Horizon
The Media Council and rights advocates have announced plans to take swift legal action. An injunction to compel transparency and judicial review of the shutdown is expected to be filed within days. Meanwhile, media houses are scrambling to reinforce contingency protocols for live political coverage.
Stakes for Kenya’s Democratic Future
This incident reopens long-standing debates about balancing national security with constitutional freedoms. As protests continue to simmer and the nation prepares for the upcoming Saba Saba demonstrations on July 7, today’s revelations raise alarming questions:
- Can the government legally silence media during civil unrest?
- Were formal judicial mechanisms bypassed in ordering the blackout?
- What safeguards are in place to prevent recurrence of such heavy-handed tactics?
For millions following the Gen Z movement, the shutdown underscored a troubling pattern—where the line between protecting peace and suppressing dissent appears increasingly thin.
Adiedo Lentitus
