Stand up and resist State's unconstitutional silent gag on Kenyan media

Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy – Walter Cronkite.

The directive by the government to cancel advertisement tenders to select media houses is more than a financial decision. It is a veiled attack on press freedom and a violation of the Constitution.

By financially starving independent journalism, the government is attempting to control public narratives and silence dissent. In a democratic society, the media is a watchdog, holding power to account.

The withdrawal of State advertising from certain media houses is censorship disguised as fiscal policy which is an oxymoronic way of muzzling free speech. The Constitution guarantees press freedom under Article 34, stating that the State shall not interfere with the media or its contents.

Article 33 further protects freedom of expression, including the right to seek and impart information. However, by cutting advertisements, the government indirectly dictates which media houses thrive and which ones struggle.

.

Keep Reading business

•  Crypto fraud surges in Africa as regulation lags, exchanges tighten security
•  Govt to release 1 million more fertiliser bags as demand surges
•  Safaricom startups drive makes return
•  EA Cables and TransCentury get lifeline in Sh4.8b loan row
•  State bans green tea hawking in fresh push to reform sector

The latest directive to withdraw state advertisements from independent media echoes these dark days. Unlike the past, when censorship came through brute force, today’s suppression is more insidious. It is censorship by economic strangulation. As the African proverb warns, ‘When the drums of oppression beat, silence is often bought, not enforced.’

Beyond media freedom, this decision also undermines consumer protection and the right to information. Article 35 of the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to access information, yet a financially crippled media is less able to provide diverse and accurate reporting.

Moreover, public institutions are required to disseminate information transparently, especially on government programmes and tenders.

When advertisements are channeled only to government-friendly media, the public is at risk of receiving selective or misleading information. The right to information is fundamental and just like the right to food, one nourishes the mind, the other the body.

The High Court should be ready take up the sword of sense to uphold press freedom and prevent economic censorship if called upon to do so. Although the government may justify this move on budgetary grounds, the selective nature of the policy reveals its true intent - punishing critical voices.

This directive is unconstitutional, violating Article 34 on media freedom, Article 33 on freedom of expression, Article 35 on the right to access information, and Article 46 on consumer protection. As Thomas Jefferson warned, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

A government that fears the press fears accountability. By weaponising state advertising, the government engages in economic censorship, a more sophisticated but equally sinister form of repression.

If this trend continues, Kenya risks sliding back to a time when truth was whispered and journalism was a dangerous profession.

The Constitution does not grant media freedom as a favour; it enshrines it as a right. Democracy dies not in darkness, but in silence. And silence, in this case, is being bought at the price of constitutional betrayal.

As the Swahili saying goes, “Nyoka akikuuma, hutakiwi kulala, lazima uamke na kujihami.” (When a snake bites you, you do not go to sleep, you wake up and defend yourself.) The Kenyan media, judiciary, and public must resist this unconstitutional move before the press becomes a ghost of its former self, whispering only what the state permits.