DPP Igonga on the sportlight about enforcing the terrorism act against demonstrators.
By IP Reporter.
NAIROBI, Kenya (IP) — Legal experts and human rights activists are sounding the alarm over the government’s decision to charge Gen Z protesters with terrorism-related offenses, calling it a dangerous legal overreach that threatens Kenya’s constitutional protections.
The protesters — many of them university students and recent graduates — have led nationwide demonstrations demanding economic reforms, job creation and greater government accountability.
Instead of addressing their grievances, authorities have responded with a harsh crackdown that includes slapping select demonstrators with terrorism charges.
“Terrorism is a serious crime involving structured networks, financing and strategic threats to national security.
Peaceful protests by young citizens cannot, in law or logic, be equated to terrorism,” said Peter Mwibanda, a legal analyst and youth advocate based in Bungoma.
Under Kenya’s Prevention of Terrorism Act, suspects can be held for up to 90 days without formal charges — a far cry from the 24-hour or 14-day limits imposed by the Constitution for other offenses.
Legal analysts argue the law is now being weaponized to deny young protesters their fundamental rights.
“These charges are not just baseless; they are unconstitutional,” said Martha Wanjiku, a Nairobi-based human rights defender.
“The Constitution protects the right to freedom of assembly and expression. To stretch anti-terror laws to criminalize dissent is an affront to democracy.”
The arrests and court rulings allowing some protesters to be detained under anti-terrorism statutes have sparked public outrage and renewed scrutiny of the judiciary’s independence.
Critics warn that such legal maneuvers risk entrenching fear and discouraging legitimate dissent.
Kenya has a long history of misusing legal frameworks to quash opposition, from post-independence sedition laws to broad interpretations of public order statutes in the 2000s.
Legal observers now see the terrorism charges as the latest tactic in this playbook.
“What we’re witnessing is an attempt to solve a social and political issue with punitive legal tools,” Mwibanda said.
“The judiciary must refuse to be used as a pawn in this contest. If we don’t draw the line now, any citizen could be next.”
Terrorism suspects in Kenya face prolonged detention without bail, limited access to legal counsel and enduring stigma.
Civil society groups say these tactics are being used deliberately to intimidate and silence the Gen Z movement.
Several rights organizations have vowed to challenge the charges in court, arguing they violate constitutional protections, due process and the right to a fair hearing.
As economic frustration and generational anger continue to fuel demonstrations, the state’s hardening response risks deepening the standoff.
Legal experts caution that repression masked as legal process could ultimately delegitimize state institutions.
“The Constitution was not drafted to protect the state from its people, but to protect the people from state overreach,” said Wanjiku.
“Terrorism charges against peaceful protesters undermine this fundamental principle.”
As the country grapples with this unfolding legal and political showdown, the integrity of Kenya’s democratic institutions hangs in the balance.
Ends.
