)
)
On June 25 2025, Kenya’s communications regulator, the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA), directed all television and radio stations to halt live coverage of nationwide demonstrations.
The authority cited Articles 33(2) and 34(1) of the Constitution of Kenya alongside Section 461 of the Kenya Information and Communications Act (KICA), 1998 as the basis of this directive.
Here is what each provision entails, why CA invoked them and what the implications are for press freedom in Kenya.
1. Article 33(2), Constitution of Kenya
)
)
)
Freedom of expression does not extend to any propaganda for war; incitement to violence; or advocacy of hatred that constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of others or incitement to cause harm.
In simple terms, this clause prohibits broadcasting content that could incite violence or hatred. Live images or commentary from protest sites may be classified as risky under this rule.
READ ALSO: Issues fuelling Wednesday demos & what activists want Kenyans to have on June 25
2. Article 34(1), Constitution of Kenya
Every person has the right of access to information held by the State or by another person and required for the exercise or protection of any right. This right shall not extend to information the disclosure of which would infringe other people’s rights, national security, public order or public morality.
Put plainly, Kenyans can request information but not if it could threaten safety or stability. Unedited live feeds may fall into the category of uncontrolled information flows leaving them subject to restriction.
3. Section 461, Kenya Information and Communications Act, 1998
This section empowers CA;
to exercise general supervision and control over all matters relating to communications, broadcasting and the use of the electro-magnetic spectrum in Kenya in the interests of public security, public order, morality and public health.
Under this mandate, live coverage may be suspended if it is deemed a threat to any of those interests.
READ ALSO: LIVE BLOG: All eyes on gov't as June 25th commemorative marches begin in Nairobi, Mombasa
Why the directive was issued
)
File image of protests outside CA headquarters in Nairobi
Recent demonstrations marking the one year anniversary of the June 25 2024 anti-Finance Bill protests have drawn large crowds in Nairobi and beyond.
The regulator’s directive frames live reporting as a possible catalyst for unrest, making the cited legal provisions the basis for silencing real-time broadcasts.
READ ALSO: 8 safety measures to take before and during protests
The trade-off between safety and transparency
The clampdown highlights a fundamental dilemma: does live reporting heighten the risk of violence or is it essential to democratic accountability?
Critics warn that muting live feeds hands narrative control to officials and leaves citizens reliant on edited news bulletins.
Media houses that defy the order face fines of up to Sh1 million or licence suspension, effectively limiting independent coverage at crucial moments.
The directive urges all TV and Radio stations to stop live coverage of protests
Balancing public order with public interest
Transparency is a cornerstone of democracy.
Live broadcasts allow viewers to observe events as they unfold, scrutinise the conduct of law-enforcement agents and share verified footage on social media.
The core question is whether the obligation to maintain public order should override the public’s right to real-time information.
For now, Kenyans must follow developments through edited bulletins and social media updates to follow events on the ground.
June 25th's media blackout may well set a lasting precedent for how Kenya balances order and openness in future demonstrations.