Kenya at 50: Fight for freedom of press continues years later

Kenya: The continued boycott by the media of functions presided over by MPs at the National Assembly’s Media Centre is the industry’s way of protesting attempts by the government to muzzle press freedom.

The demonstration hit a crescendo last Tuesday at Parliament Buildings after journalists declined to cover a press conference called by Leader of Majority Aden Duale.

This may look like a modern-day invention by scribes fighting for freedom of the press and those seeing the struggle for the first time, but records indicate that the fight for press freedom was much alive in pre-independence Kenya. On the first day of August 1963, the East African Standard published a story on page three titled “Opposition MP attacks ‘threats’ in speeches”, in which the then shadow Justice minister, JM Seroney, questioned the government’s commitment to guaranteeing freedom of speech on the floor of the House.

Implied Threat

“He said he was not referring to the speeches of ‘irresponsible government backbenchers’, but to statements made seriously by ministers. One such statement was the ‘implied threat’ by Information minister, Mr Oneko, that he would shut down the Press if it did not say what the government wanted,” stated the paper.

While Seroney was cheered and jeered in Parliament for his stand on press freedom, the Jubilee government is yet to meet any open hostility for policies, including some clauses in the proposed Media Bill 2013, which got media stakeholders worried.

Sections of the Bill that guarantee self-regulation of the Press were deleted from the original draft, raising speculation that the government was moving to curtail press freedom.

During Seroney’s contribution to the House of Representatives, he told members that Oneko had claimed to have a mandate from the Prime Minister, Jomo Kenyatta, to suppress the press.

But Ngala Abok (Kanu Homa Bay) intervened to say that the minister had not claimed permission to suppress the press, but had said he would have the right to act if the media conducted itself in such a way as to hinder progress.

The paper quoted Seroney replying thus; “I think we are moving into very dangerous waters when the government sets itself up as a judge of what is constructive or unconstructive.”

The fight for freedom of the press could fester, but the haggling is not new, especially because the State has often accused the media of hiding behind freedom of the press to upset or compromise national interest.

It could continue because the government has given no indication of bowing to demands to delete the offensive clauses from the Media Bill 2013.