Nakuru opens door to online censorship

Director of Digital Media and Diaspora Communication Dennis Itumbi (right) shows Nakuru County Governor Kinuthia Mbugua the basics of Wi-Fi connectivity during the launch of free Wi-Fi at Moi Road in Nakuru town on March 30, 2014. PHOTO/SULEIMAN MBATIAH 

In Summary

• Kenya is currently listed among the 29 countries in the world that have freedom of the Internet.
• Government filtering of online content would encroach on Article 33 of the Constitution

By Peter Mwaura
More by this Author

Nakuru holds the pride of place after the launch in the town this week of the first free Wi-Fi in the country. But it has also opened the door to official interference with online freedom in the name of fighting pornography and other offensive sites.

Free Internet is part of the Jubilee manifesto, which promises free Internet zones in major towns. In today’s world of information-based economies, free Internet is a basic right, just like water and electricity.

And a free municipal Wi-Fi is more economical than having individuals and private companies pay. It’s also a way of stimulating economic development.

This digital right could be watered down by unwarranted filtering in the name of fighting pornography. The problem with pornography is that when it’s not defined, it becomes a catch-all for whatever the censor does not like.

During the launch of the Wi-Fi in Nakuru, Governor Kinuthia Mbugua said: “I am happy that those who installed the free connectivity blocked pornography and other offensive sites and now our people, students included, can get useful information.”

Those sentiments are likely to be repeated elsewhere as free Internet is rolled out in other towns. That will be regressive. Kenya is currently listed among the 29 countries in the world that have freedom of the Internet.

The “Freedom on the NET 2013” report published by Freedom House on October 3, 2013, shows that Kenya and South Africa are the only African countries that have Internet freedom. The report covers developments in 60 countries that occurred between May 2012 and April 2013.

STANDARDS OF CLARITY

Government filtering of online content in Kenya would interfere with the basic rights of millions. With 47.1 per cent of the population connected, Kenya has one of the highest Internet penetrations in Africa, according to the latest statistics by the Communications Commission of Kenya published in January 2014. We have 19.1 million Internet users.

Government filtering of online content would encroach on Article 33 of the Constitution that guarantees every person the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom to seek, receive, or impart information or ideas. Limitations to that freedom is only permitted to protect the rights of others, national security, public order, public health and morals.

In any case, any law or regulation limiting a basic freedom must meet standards of clarity and precision so that people know exactly when they are in the wrong. Vaguely worded sentiments are, therefore, unhelpful.

As it is, pornography is not defined in Kenyan law, though the Kenya Film Classification Board defines it as the “depiction of erotic behaviour intended to cause sexual excitement”. Even that definition brings huge problems of proportionality and intention.

Some material may be wholly intended to produce sexual arousal. Others may be intended to make a broader social point. Should they all be lumped together as pornography?

Besides, the important thing is not whether something is pornographic but whether it causes harm, and under what circumstances.

gigirimwaura@yahoo.com