Passaris proposes measures to manage future protests

Nairobi Woman Rep Esther Passaris is seeking an amendment to the Public Order Act to manage future protests and ostensibly tame destruction of property as evidenced from last week’s protests.

Passaris made her submissions to the National Assembly Committee on Administration and Internal Security, chaired by Narok West MP Gabriel Tongoyo, which attracted divided opinion from members.

Although a majority of MPs supported the amendments, they called for caution to ensure it does not interfere with the freedoms provided in Article 37 of the Constitution.

Passaris has made proposals in the Public Order (Amendment) Bill, 2025 to amend the Public Order Act Cap 56 to provide demarcation of assembly and demonstration zones, in which persons may hold public meetings and public processions as provided for under Article 37 of the Constitution.

Similarly, she is seeking the amendment of Section 2 of the Public Order Act to redefine the terms “public meeting” and public procession” and to include the definitions of capital city, city, urban area and assembly and demonstration zone.

She has also proposed that Clause 3 of the Bill provides for the insertion of new sections 5A and 5B, with proposals that section 5A empowers the Cabinet Secretary to designate assembly and demonstration zones in consultation with the county governments in the capital city, cities and urban areas.

“The proposed Section 5B prohibits holding of a public meeting or public procession within a radius of 100 metres from the precincts of Parliament as described under the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act, a protected area under the Protected Areas Act and a building in which a courtroom is situated. Contravention of this provision is an offense with a penalty of a fine not exceeding Sh100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both,” Passaris has proposed.

Kisumu County MP Rosa Buyu said the question should be focused on why people picket, noting that they take that move when they are expressing displeasure and want the government to know they are unhappy about an issue.

“My issue is, when we designate areas for picketing, for example, decide that anybody who wants to demonstrate should go to an area that basically has no people… And then we send them to go and picket somewhere in a solitary area. Would you therefore be curtailing their freedom of expression to be heard? Because you have taken us to an area with no people, and you’re telling us, that’s where you can go and shout yourself hoarse,” Buyu said.

She posed, “So then what will we have achieved with that picketing? What I’m trying to say is that you are regulating expression of people who are unhappy, so that they just listen to themselves. When you take them to a solitary area, aren’t you therefore minimizing the opportunity to let people know I’m unhappy about something?”

But Sotik MP Francis Sigei commended the amendment, saying it is making an effort to balance an issue which is taking on peace, justice and rule of law.

“This is coming up after a very serious, very serious situation. I also want to support this, she has come up with other jurisdictions and how they do it. What we are trying to do is to bring sanity in our country, to make sure that lives are safe and safeguarding all the rights of all individuals in this country,” he said.

Sigei noted that this is a critical amendment and there is need to protect affairs of the country, while respecting the rule of law.

Teso North MP Oku Kaunya agreed that the proposals in the bill will go a long way in redefining some of the things that were previously not in law, especially the spaces where demonstrations should be held.

With Mandera East MP Weyton Mohammed adding, “This is an idea whose time has come. I think the best thing is to enrich it, this is an important amendment because where we are going is not safe… that anybody can go to State House, Parliament or even police stations. We need to contain demonstrations.”

Tongoyo said that there is need to look at the bigger picture to be able to stay balanced and achieve what needs to be done, which is up to the legislators.

“We must take lessons, and we must learn from what has been built in the past year as we try to sanitize the space so that we not only offend but also do the right thing. It should be done in an organized manner to ensure there is no destruction of property, invasion of government institution and protected area among other issues,” Tongoyo said.

Nyakach MP Aduma Owuor said there is need to look into the matter soberly and also find a way of instilling values to the Gen Z other than condemning them.

“I do not think that changing the public order will change anything, we must first address the realities. We need a relook into Article 37 to bring order,” he said.

Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma said something needs to be done urgently with regards to protests, saying that what has been witnessed lately is absolute disorder.

He, however, suggested to Passaris that she should consider having the bill stand on its own to avoid the risk of being accused of interfering with the Public Order Act.

“I have a problem with making amendments under the Public Order Act because people will think we want to take away their rights and we should determine whether to amend the Act or make an independent law… People are getting away with murder, theft and we are not able to do anything. We need to get our country and create order on how to picket and deliver petitions,” Kaluma said.

But Passaris explained that when she thought of the amendments, it was about protecting the sanctity of the institutions that hold the country together.

According to her, the kind of protests that have been witnessed lately are the kind that the Gen Z insist that they do not have a leader so nobody knows who to be called in the event of dialogue.

“We find ourselves in a dangerous space if this country gets itself into total anarchy. We have lost lives and will continue losing more, we need to do something,” Passaris stated.

Currently, Passaris said assemblies, demonstrations and picketing are governed by Article 37 of the Constitution and the Public Order Act, Cap. 56.

She said Section 5 of the Act provides for regulation of public meetings and processions, which requires any person intending to convene a public meeting or a public procession to notify the regulating officer of such intent at least three days but not more than fourteen days before the proposed date of the public meeting or procession.