The High Court in Nairobi has issued a conservatory order suspending the directive by the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) that banned live television and radio coverage of public protests. The ruling, delivered on June 25 by Justice Chacha Mwita, follows a petition filed by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), which argued that the CA’s directive posed a serious threat to press freedom and the public’s right to information.
The CA had directed all broadcasters to cease live coverage of demonstrations scheduled for June 25, 2025, and any future protests, citing concerns over public order and safety. The move drew sharp criticism from media houses, civil society groups, and human rights defenders, who saw the directive as a form of censorship.
In his ruling, Justice Mwita noted that the LSK’s petition raised “fundamental constitutional questions” regarding the potential violation of the Bill of Rights, including media freedom. “A conservatory order is hereby issued suspending, with immediate effect, the directive Ref No. CA/CE/BC/TV90A or any other directive issued by Communication Authority of Kenya to all television and radio stations directing them to stop live coverage of the demonstrations,” he stated.
The court also ordered the immediate restoration of any broadcasting signals that had been switched off due to the CA’s directive. Justice Mwita emphasized the urgency and public interest in the matter, allowing the service of the order via email, television broadcasts, or newspapers.
All parties involved have been directed to file their responses within three days. The case is scheduled for further directions on July 2, 2025.
The High Court’s decision comes at a time of heightened political tension in Kenya, with nationwide protests demanding government accountability and reforms. The ruling temporarily reinstates the media’s ability to broadcast events as they unfold, reinforcing the critical role of a free press in a democratic society.
As the legal battle continues, attention now turns to the upcoming hearing, which will determine whether the CA’s directive stands up to constitutional scrutiny.
