freedom and independence of the media in Kenya

 freedom and independence of the media in Kenya

All over the world, the media is an essential part of peoples ‘lives. Kenya’s Constitution 2010 rolled out a new and progressive bill of rights requiring extensive reforms to both media and information management frameworks. Currently, complaints are being raised on the content of the media, media ownerships have raised objections to the passage of new media laws, and there is a failure to address existing legislative and institutional inconsistencies. This analysis focuses on the likelihood of a disparity in the legislation and institutional frameworks relating to various articles of the media Act 2013. The report will moreover look into the freedom and independence of the media in Kenya and the extent to which their implementation affects the practice of media in regards to the below articles;

• Privacy of individual
• Covering ethnic, religious and sectarian conflicts
• Protection of children
• Recording of interviews and telephone conversation
• Hate speech

Privacy of individual, this section provides for the confidentiality of individuals in the process of broadcasting and gathering of news information. It protects the privacy right of an individual against instruction and inquiries into an individual’s private life without the said person’s consent. This article may only be forfeited if the information is for a public interest, this must be legitimately confirmed and must not be based on mere curiosity. The section has not been implemented entirely by the media practitioners; there are many cases in Kenya concerning breach of privacy right by media practices. The scenario cases mostly involve the Kenyan media conducting a private and secret investigation into the personal lives of some famous politicians to make News in defense of public interest. The violation of this kind has led to defamation of individuals. It has also posed a threat to the lives of individuals due to exposure to too much information concerning the private life of individuals.

The recent case of the privacy breach in Kenya is the Lifestyle Audit, which was supposed to be carried out by a given specialized government body but seemingly failed. Various media house undertook to carry out the secret investigation and published, this is unlawful and should be avoided if at all, there is a need to implement this section of media Act 2013 fully.

Covering ethnic, religious, and sectarian conflicts, this article is mostly for the interest of peaceful coexistence in times of tension or significant occurrences concerning the racial and religious divides. In the provision, News, views or comments on ethnic, religious or sectarian dispute shall be published or broadcast after proper verification of facts and presented with due caution and restraint in a manner which is conducive to the creation of an atmosphere congenial to national harmony, amity, and peace. The comments made during the broadcast should be the one that harmonizes the situation and should never suggest that the journalist has some interest in a given side.

This section of the media act has not been fully implemented as many journalists of various media houses still make some very bias comments concerning numerous disputes amongst communities. This section of the media Act is always prone to violations both by the media personnel and the public in an attempt to safeguard their interest.

Protection of children, Children, are categorized as the vulnerable members of society. Due to the vulnerability, they should, therefore, be protected from the media. The section for children protection provides that, Children shall not be identified in cases concerning sexual offenses, whether as victims, witnesses, or defendants. Except in matters of public interest, for example, cases of child abuse or abandonment, journalists shall not normally interview or photograph children on subjects involving their welfare in the absence, or without the consent, of a parent or other adult who is responsible for the children. And also, no media shall make children coverage while in school without authority consent. Children are under parents’ care, and anything that may involve them directly, the media shall seek permission from the guardian.

This act is vital in protecting kids from societal vices such as the children trafficking and abduction as a result of providing the identities to the perpetrators. This act was also majorly formed to protect the kids from discrimination that they may face while in school and various recreational facilities as a result of being covered as a victim of various issues stipulated in the subsection above. The provision is adhered to a great extent by the Kenyan media as the children victim’s identity is always protected in various media coverage.

Recording of interviews and telephone conversation, this provision has been violated in many instances by some freelance media and professional journalists with the intention of getting the news leads. As a result, advanced technology in ICT, this section of the media act faces so many violation cases. Currently, media houses are carrying out some independent and secret investigative journalism in a bid to uncover some rotes in the society terming them as exposé. Mostly the media house shields themselves behind the protection of media when it comes to the public interest. The latest case in Kenya is when a big media house was stopped from airing an exposé concerning children’s home, which they aired anyway. The exposés involve recording and capturing of videos without the parties’ consent. This article has mostly been violated, but the media has gone away with it in the court of law, citing the News are for the public interest.

Hate speech, in this provision, Careful account shall be taken of the possible effect upon the ethnic or racial group concerned, and on the population as a whole, and of the changes in public attitudes as to what is and what is not acceptable when using such terms. Racist or negative ethnic words shall be avoided, quoting persons making derogatory remarks based on ethnicity, race, creed, color, and sex shall not be allowed.

This section of the media Act 2013 has landed many media professionals on the wrong side of the law. Still, unfortunately, most of the perpetrators have gone away with the charges due to some rote within the Kenyan legal system. Several politicians have made some careless remarks concerning some ethnic gropes in the country. Still, nothing has been done to them as no action has been taken against them as stipulated in the constitution apart from some simple follow up and after a while, the case vanishes into thin air. Some media personalities have also been caught on the wrong side of this act either by intension or accidentally in the process of discharging the journalism duties. This act calls for the utmost professionalism for the professionals and also needs the citizen to be responsible for what they speak in the media. This section of the Laws is doing so poor when it comes to the implementation of media laws.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Kenya, as a country, is still not doing so well as far as the implementation of media law is concerned. Most of the Kenyan media are still under the control of media ownership and political influence. Most of the media house owners in Kenya are the political class making it almost impossible to have free media, which can allow the full implementation of the media laws.