)
)
Over the past two decades, courts in Kenya have consistently rejected attempts to silence the press.
From live broadcast bans to lawsuits aimed at killing exposes, judges have repeatedly ruled in favour of press freedom, citing public interest and constitutional protections.
Here are six landmark moments when the courts stood with the media:
1. June 25, 2025: Court suspends CA’s protest blackout directive
)
)
)
CA Director General David Mugonyi
Just hours after the CA ordered a halt to live coverage of ongoing protests, the High Court declared the directive unconstitutional.
The court found that only the Media Council of Kenya (not the CA) has the legal authority to set broadcast standards. It ordered an immediate restoration of any signals that had been taken off air.
EXPLAINER: 3 laws CA quoted in directive to halt June 25th live coverage
2. November 2024: CA’s programming mandate struck down
)
File image of protests outside CA headquarters in Nairobi
In November 2024, the High Court ruled that the Communications Authority has no constitutional authority to regulate content or set broadcast standards.
That role, the court said, belongs solely to the Media Council of Kenya.
The court declared large parts of the Kenya Information and Communications Act unconstitutional and nullified CA’s entire Broadcasting Code.
Although enforcement of the judgment was delayed to allow for transition, the legal position was made clear: content regulation is off-limits for CA.
READ ALSO: 9 legal battles that made headlines in 2024
3. March 2023: Ruling against censure of TV stations covering protests
Following the broadcast of opposition protests in March 2023, CA accused six TV stations of violating programming standards and threatened action against them.
)
Communications Authority of Kenya
The Authority demanded “immediate remedial measures” and hinted at license suspensions.
Media watchdogs challenged the move, and in October 2023, the High Court overturned CA’s actions.
The court held that the Programming Code being relied on had expired and that the censure lacked legal basis.
READ ALSO: Meet Ruto's aide taking over as Communications Authority director general
4. February 2022: Sipili Hospital fails to block investigative broadcast
When NTV prepared to air an exposé on alleged abuse and malpractice at Sipili Maternity and Nursing Home in Laikipia County, the hospital sought an injunction to stop the story.
)
The Kenya High Court
The High Court declined. Justice C. Kariuki ruled that the hospital had not demonstrated irreparable harm and that the Nation Media Group had presented valid defences, including public interest.
The court refused to gag the story, upholding the principle that prior restraint on the media must only be used in exceptional circumstances.
5. December 2020: Steel factory loses attempt to gag Citizen TV
Citizen TV aired a segment alleging workplace fatalities and environmental pollution linked to Endmor Steel Millers Ltd in Machakos.
In response, the company rushed to court to block further reporting.
Justice D.K. Kemei of the High Court dismissed the injunction application, finding that the story addressed matters of public concern and that Endmor had not met the high legal bar required to justify a publishing ban.
6. May 2018: Blogger protected after criticising media council
)
Media Council of Kenya CEO David Omwoyo
The Media Council of Kenya once went to court to restrain a blogger, Eric Orina, from publishing leaked emails critical of the council.
The case was ultimately dismissed, partly due to procedural delays.
However, the High Court took the opportunity to reaffirm that gag orders are not the default response to critical or even uncomfortable commentary.
READ ALSO: Media Council considers accreditation of content creators
What does it mean for press freedom?
The CA’s attempt this week to control protest coverage fits a familiar pattern.
Time and again, the courts have emphasised that freedom of expression and media independence are foundational rights, not privileges that can be revoked on a whim.
Unless there’s overwhelming legal justification, attempts to silence or block the press have little traction in Kenya’s courtrooms.
Wednesday’s ruling was not a one-off. It was part of a judicial legacy that views the press not as a threat but as a constitutional necessity.