As I have traveled the world, there have been numerous opportunities for me to sit back and think about what it means to be American. Though I have lived overseas continuously since 2002, no matter where I go, I am defined by Americanness. For six years, people have asked me about George Bush, Iraq, September 11th, and why Americans don't play football or cricket. Now I am being asked about Barack Obama, the economy, and why Americans don't play football or cricket. But what does it mean to be American? After reading about the Kenyan Communications Act of 2008, I have grasped part of the answer. Somewhere, inherently ingrained into our being, Americans value freedom. We may have misguided leadership that tries to impose our rights onto others ala Iraq, but at the core, Americanness on some level means having personal rights.
After reading about the recent passage of the Kenyan Communications (Amendment) Act of 2008, one of the fundamental rights that Americans value is freedom of the press. Generally speaking, the American media is inherently biased, not in how it covers a story, but in what it chooses to report. (A case in point would be covering the exploits of Somali pirates and the hijacking of ships while not covering the root cause of the problem which is illegal fishing and the dumping of toxic waste in Somali waters.) However, with the internet, satellite dishes, and other modern forms of communication, informtion can be gathered, processed, and discussed on a large scale. Nobody will limit my right to say whatever I want to say. I can say that George W. Bush is the worst President in American history. I can say that George W. Bush is my hero. Regardless of my position, I will not be thrown into a United States prison for writing what I think.
This is perhaps what is so disturbing about Kenya. Kenya has largely been seen as the most developed country in East Africa, and perhaps along with South Africa, Ghana, Botswana, and a select few other African countries, as being a stable bastion of democracy on the continent. This image was further burnished by the election of Mwai Kibabi in 2002, in an election that saw KANU, the party that had ruled Kenya since independence, trounced in a landslide election. Five years later, Kibaki's election was controversial and resulted in ethnic violence which left over 1000 people dead and thousands
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0286b/0286bdb11a8d4f4171f3ace0212f741e360ff3c6" alt=""
more displaced (many of whom are still internally displaced persons...IDPs). To be fair, Kibaki has done many good things, including the aboltioin of school fees. Moreover, Kibaki has allowed ministers to run their departments (and thus introduce much needed reforms) rather than concentrating so much power in the head of government.
However, his enthusiasm for reform has dissipated as his government has become increasingly unpopular. This has culminated in the Kenyan Communications Act (Amendment) 2008. This bill essentially vests in the government the power to regulate the media within the state of Kenya. There are two main points of contention with the current bill. The first is that the state has the right to seize broadcasting equipment if the Internal Security Minister deems the usage of such equipment to be neccessary during a "State Emergency". The second issue is that letters can be seized and opened if the Internal Security Minister deems the contents to be a threat to the government of Kenya. Currently, a debate rages about these two issues. Media outlets have written to Kibaki's government to ask him to reconsider some of the provisions in the bill.
http://www.eastandard.net/InsidePage.php?id=1144003450&cid=418&
The interesting thing to me is the fact that these provisions have already been enshrined in Kenyan law for ten years. They were originally part of the Kenyan Communications Act of 1998. Thus, Kenyans have already been denied their political voice for years. Was this not a problem during Daniel Arap Moi's government, which was one of the most corrupt in African history in terms of money stolen from the country's coffers? Were these provisions not a problem for the media during Kibaki's first term when Kibaki was popular with the media?
I think that the answer is quite clear. The media is feeling the pinch of criticizing Kibaki's government and is justifiably fearful that the government will use these old laws in an attempt to curb their freedom and independence. This would be a travesty to democracy in Kenya and lurch Kenya ever closer towards being another autarchic government where the people's freedoms are limited. If this law is not amended, it will be a sad day for Kenyan democracy. Therefore, it is important that this Amendment exclude provisions which allow for freedom of the press.
Richard the Nomad
P.S. Someone please tell the government of Kenya to clean the Statehouse website.
http://www.statehousekenya.go.ke/ I tried to download a picture of Mwai Kibaki for this blog and it gave me a virus. Eish. Thanks Kenyan government!
Read More...
Collapse post...