Legal Experts Condemn DPP for Misusing Terrorism Charges Against Peaceful Protesters in Kenya

In a wave of growing unrest, legal experts in Kenya have sharply criticized the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for what they describe as the misuse of terrorism charges against individuals participating in peaceful protests. This controversy has sparked widespread concern among human rights advocates, legal professionals, and the public, who argue that the DPP’s actions threaten constitutional rights and suppress dissent in the country.

The accusations stem from a series of recent protests, particularly those linked to the June 25 demonstrations, which saw citizens take to the streets to voice grievances over issues such as corruption, police brutality, and economic mismanagement. These protests, largely led by Kenya’s youth and often referred to as the "Gen Z protests," have been met with heavy-handed responses from authorities, including arrests and, in some cases, violence. The DPP’s decision to apply terrorism-related charges to some of these protesters has drawn particular ire, with critics arguing that it represents an alarming overreach of state power.

Legal experts have pointed out that terrorism charges, which carry severe penalties, are being used to target individuals exercising their constitutional right to peaceful assembly. The Kenyan Constitution guarantees the right to protest, and many argue that the application of such serious charges is a deliberate tactic to intimidate and silence dissenters. Prominent figures in the legal community have accused the DPP of undermining the rule of law by allowing political motivations to influence prosecutorial decisions. They warn that this practice risks eroding public trust in the justice system and could push Kenya toward authoritarianism.

One high-profile case that has fueled the controversy involves activist Boniface Mwangi, whose arrest was linked to alleged terrorism activities during the June 25 protests. Mwangi’s legal team and family have accused the police of planting evidence, including ammunition and tear gas canisters, to justify the charges. The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) has demanded Mwangi’s immediate release, calling the allegations baseless and urging an independent investigation into the conduct of security forces. This case has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over the misuse of terrorism laws, with many seeing it as emblematic of a broader pattern of repression.

The judiciary has also weighed in on the issue, with spokespersons emphasizing their commitment to upholding justice in cases involving allegations of police misconduct. Courts have been urged to process these cases impartially and expeditiously to ensure that those wrongfully charged are not unjustly punished. Meanwhile, international observers, including representatives from the United Nations, have expressed concern over the violent crackdowns on protests and called for accountability and transparency in how authorities handle demonstrators.

The protests themselves have been marked by significant unrest, with reports of police brutality drawing condemnation from both local and international human rights groups. According to the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, at least 51 people have been killed and over 100 injured in protest-related violence over a two-month period. The death of a 12-year-old girl, struck by a stray bullet in Kiambu County, and the custodial death of a teacher who criticized a senior police official have further intensified public outrage. These incidents have underscored the need for reforms in how security forces engage with protesters.

Critics of the DPP’s approach argue that the use of terrorism charges not only stifles free expression but also diverts resources from addressing genuine security threats. They point to Kenya’s history of grappling with actual terrorist activities, such as those linked to groups like Al-Shabaab, and argue that conflating peaceful protests with such threats undermines efforts to combat real dangers. The legal community has called for a clear distinction between criminal behavior and legitimate protest activities, urging the DPP to adhere to principles of fairness and proportionality in its prosecutorial decisions.

The controversy has also reignited discussions about the independence of Kenya’s institutions. Former Chief Justice David Maraga recently accused the government of capturing key bodies, including the police and the DPP, to serve political ends. He warned that such actions threaten the democratic gains Kenya has made since the adoption of its 2010 Constitution. Maraga’s remarks reflect a broader sentiment among activists and legal scholars that the state is increasingly relying on coercive measures to maintain control amid growing public discontent.

As the situation unfolds, human rights organizations and legal advocates are calling for several measures to address the crisis. These include an immediate halt to the use of terrorism charges against peaceful protesters, independent investigations into allegations of police misconduct, and greater protections for the right to assembly. They also urge the government to engage in dialogue with protesters to address their grievances, rather than resorting to force or legal intimidation.

The mounting criticism of the DPP’s actions highlights a critical juncture for Kenya’s democracy. With public frustration growing and the 2027 elections on the horizon, the government’s handling of dissent will likely remain a contentious issue. For now, the legal community and human rights advocates continue to demand accountability, insisting that the right to protest must be protected as a cornerstone of Kenya’s democratic framework.