Report: "Civic space still constrained like Moi's"

Despite the promise of the 2010 Constitution, majority of Kenyans believe the civic space in the country is still as bad as it was during the regime of independence constitution, a report shows.

The report by the Defenders Coalition titled “Trends of Civic Space in Kenya: An Assessment” says that majority feel the government has over securitised the civic space and crimininalised dissent, making it risky for public-conscious citizens and organisations to speak up.

It says the first two years of President William Ruto administration have been characterised by mixed fortunes, citing the operationalisation of the PBO Act as a great start.

Cup pressure peaks as Shabana host Kenya Police in blockbuster quarter-final Football

Upper Hill coach Walgwe unperturbed despite drawing giants in Prescott Cup group phase Rugby

But the high hopes fizzled as soon after, “it has been undermined by widespread repression, legislative rollback and securitisation of civic activism.”

The dominant trend is escalation of repression and illiberalism, characterised by aggravation of the state hostility towards legitimate civic activity, violent suppression of peaceful assembly and protests, extrajudicial killings and abductions, the report reads.

The review, which was a perception survey, shows a state that is persistently hostile to civic space.

“Continuities are reflected in the reliance on securitisation, harassment of CSOs and media, selective implementation of constitutional protections and disregard for court rulings. The bright side has been the Judiciary,” it reads.

The report shows the country’s civic space has oscillated between promise and regression since 2010, and that “while the constitution established a progressive framework, successive administrations hollowed out its protections through repression, securitisation and impunity.”

The resilience of civil society and the Judiciary remain vital counterweights, but without genuine political will, Kenya risks further democratic backsliding, it warns.

The national survey involved 2,048 respondents of all genders drawn from Nairobi, Machakos, Kisumu, Kericho, Busia, Meru, Kakamega, Nyeri, Nakuru and Mombasa counties.

The majority of respondents were not convinced they could enjoy their civil liberties without fear of harassment by police or other state agents.

“…slightly over 2/3 of the respondents did not trust that the government respected the citizens’ rights to public participation. Consistent with this lack of trust, 61.32 per cent of the respondents were not confident they could engage in public participation without fear of harassment by police or other state agents,” it reads.

With regard to the collaboration between the state and CSOs in enhancing the respect for human rights and the rule of law, only the residents of Kericho believed the state had increased its efforts to collaborate with the CSOs in the promotion of human rights and the rule of law in Kenya.

Also, majority (56 per cent) of the respondents characterised the freedom of assembly in Kenya as either bad or very bad.

Less than a quarter of the respondents (24 per cent) said the conditions of the freedom of assembly in Kenya were either good or very good. 18 per cent of the respondents found the status of freedom of assembly to be neither good nor bad.

Further, when disaggregated, the counties had varying ratings on the freedom of assembly. Kericho, Kakamega and Busia counties rated the status of the freedom of assembly as good.

While a large percentage of residents in Kisumu rated the freedom of assembly as bad, the majority in the rest of the counties rated it as very bad.

Also, the respondents decried alleged surveillance by government operatives, especially in the security sector, claiming this is done physically or through their online platforms.

This coerces "people to compliance and limiting their scope for expressing critical opinions and mobilising others."