The high Court this morning threw out an appeal by Bloggers Association of Kenya alias BAKE
The bloggers were challenging the law that criminalises free speech.
High Court Judge James Makau ruled that the petition was unwarranted.
In 2016, another judge, Lady Justice Mumbi Ngugi had declared that section 29D of the Kenya Information and Communications Act unconstitutional (KICA)
To add on to that, Justice Wilfrida Okwany declared section 84D of the KICA law unconstitutional too in 2019 after a successful challenge by Blogger Cyprian Nyakundi. Justice Okwany categorically stated that public officials should be ready to be criticised.
“Kenya is a dictatorship and leaders who come to power through bribery, killing, maiming and stealing don’t want to be corrected or told the truth”, a Kenyan spoke to KenyanBullettin.com on condition of anonymity said.
Now netizens have responded to say that this is a well-laid plan to start arresting bloggers who are not liked by the government.
Here are some opinions that we sampled:
https://twitter.com/CisNyakundi/status/1230414735134396416?s=19
Seems like @BakeKenya were bribed by the proponents of this misguided bill, to front weak lawyers and sabotage the case. BAKE has become trash. More like a department under Ezekiel Mutua’s refreshments budget. https://t.co/KgsVdesFjc
— Francis Gaitho (@Kenyafootball) February 20, 2020
Am afraid this is a naive & mistaken way of looking at the matter. The purpose of this provision is less abt successful prosecutions & more abt giving the state an excuse to criminalise opinions it doesn't like, not to mention requiring pple to censor themselves in the 1st place.
— #LindaKatiba 🇰🇪 (@KaranjaMatindi) February 20, 2020
https://twitter.com/CisNyakundi/status/1230415660548841472?s=19
Justice Makau has declared the Computer Misuse & Cybercrimes Act of 2018 valid in it's entirety. Including the parts that sneaked back Criminal Defamation provisions that were declared unconstitutional by Justice Mativo. @article19eafric @BakeKenya @Olez @SDMaundu @gathara pic.twitter.com/iAuTJzwq11
— Demas Kiprono (@kipdemas) February 20, 2020
https://twitter.com/lagaless/status/1230421731267039232?s=19
It is now illegal to cybersquat. To own any domain bearing the name of a famous person or corporation with the hope that they will seek to purchase it from you in future.
— Demas Kiprono (@kipdemas) February 20, 2020
For instance discrediting the reputation of a person is the domain of libel and defamation and should not be in criminal law.
— Mr.Murang'a (@Gitongamuranga) February 20, 2020
