Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
TOPIC
CRITIC GOVERNMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR CENSORSHIP AND EXPLAIN
METHODS USED IN CENSHORSHIP.
PRESENTED BY:
1. HELEN NDEGWA
IS/MPHIL/02/O7
2. CLEOPHUS AMBIRA
IS/MPHIL/026/07
3. NYAWANGO ANDREW
IS/MPHIL/024/07
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. Introduction
1.1 Definition
1.2 Types of Censorships
2. Censorship in Kenya
2.1 Background
2.2 Previous Censorships
3. Reasons for Censorship
4. Methods of Censorship
5. Critique of the Methods
6. Challenges to Censorship
7. Limitations to Censorship
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Definition
Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which
may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government
or media organizations as determined by a censor.
Censorship is the systematic control of any content of communication by means of
constitutional, judicial, administrative, financial, or physical measures imposed directly
by or with connivance of the ruling power or ruling elite. It may be accompanied by
violence or may not.
If a government wish to impose censorship, there are broad categories of information that
has to be brought under control; internal and external sources of information.
Censorship assumes that certain ideas and forms of expression are threatening to
individual, organizational and societal well-being as defined by those in power or those
involved in a moral crusade and hence must be prohibited. It presupposes absolute
standards which must not be violated.
Much censorship assumes that all individuals, not just children, are vulnerable and need
protection from offending material --whether pornography or radical criticism of existing
political and religious authority. Individuals can not be trusted to decide what they wish
to see and read or to freely form their own opinions.
Some censorship is largely symbolic, offering a way to enhance social solidarity by
avoiding insults to shared values (e.g., a prohibition on flag burning). It may be a form of
moral education as with prohibitions on racist and sexist speech. Or masquerading under
high principles of protecting public welfare and morals, it may simply involve a desire to
protect the interests of the politically, economically and religiously powerful by
restricting alternative views, criticism and delegitimating information.
Among the most common historical rationales are political (sedition, treason, national
security), religious (blasphemy, heresy), moral (obscenity, impiety), and social (incivility,
2
irreverence, disorder). These of course may be interconnected. What they share is a claim
that the public interest will be negatively affected by the communication. Censorship may
be located relative to other legal forms of secrecy. Censorship is justified by the
protection of public welfare. Rationales for other legally supported forms include: the
protection of private property for trade secrets; economic efficiency and fairness
justifications in common law disputes over secret information; the encouragement of
honest communication and/or protection from retaliation underling forms such as lawyerclient and doctor-patient confidentiality, the secret ballot, and a judges en camera ruling
that the identity of an informant need not be revealed; the protection of intimate relations
in the case of spousal privilege; the protection against improperly elicited confessions
underlying the 5th Amendment; the strategic advantage justification of sealed warrants
and indictments and the respect for the dignity and privacy of the person justification for
limits on the collection and use of personal information, whether involving census, tax,
library or arrest (as against conviction) records. There has been little empirical research
on whether, how well and with what consequences and under what conditions these
justifications are met.
1.2 Types of Censorship
Moral censorship, is the removal of materials that are obscene or otherwise morally
questionable. Pornography, for example, is often censored under this rationale,
especially child pornography, which is censored in most jurisdictions in the world.
Political censorship occurs when governments hold back information from their
citizens. The logic is to exert control over the populace and prevent free expression
that might foment rebellion.
2. CENSORSHIP IN KENYA
2.1 Background
The political transition from British colony to independent country was mirrored by
changes in the mass media in Kenya. In 1963 when Kenya became independent the vast
majority of broadcasts on government-owned radio and television stations were imported
British and American programmes, but this was set to change. Kenyan culture was
promoted via the mass media under the presidency of Jomo Kenyatta as more
programmes were broadcast in Swahili and there was a focus on African music and
dance. Likewise, newspapers covered more African traditions and culture.
The press later suffered under Kenyattas successor Daniel Arap Moi and his one-party
state, which was written into the constitution in 1982. A clampdown on journalists led to
arrests and imprisonment as state officials were worried about the media challenging the
government.
The scene changed and the press expanded markedly with the birth of multi-party politics
in 1992, which was a response to pressure from Kenyan activists and the international
community. The daily newspaper market increased to four when the People Daily was set
up and the alternative press -commonly called the gutter press- also emerged. Harsh
criticism of the state by the press went hand-in-hand with the emergence of opposition
politics and this environment was a far cry from the conformist media of the earlier era.
Yet journalists were still intimidated, threatened and imprisoned by the government and
in May 2002 a new unpopular media bill was passed. It requires publishers to purchase a
bond for 1million Kenyan shillings (6,900) before publishing. The move scared off a
number of small time publishers, especially in the magazine sector, as they could not
afford the bond.
Censorship has been in Kenya since pre-independence and became more pronounced in
the 1970s onwards.
To control the internal sources, the government controls the press, the television, the
radio, book publishing and education. For the external sources of information, the
government controls postal services, telephone, telegram communication, external radio
and television, etc. Just for mention, there is Official Secrets Acts and Sedition Acts,
which were introduced by the colonial government, mainly to intimidate the writers and
the recipients of information.
The years of the early 70s were the worst period in the history of censorship in Kenya. It
was also the period when many writers and intellectuals fled the country to escape
harassment, arrest and possible detention. Many leading writers such as Ngugi wa
Thiong'o, Kimani Gecai, Micere Mugo and Ngugi wa Muriu sought refuge in various
countries in Africa, Europe and America. Some of Ngugi wa Thiong'o's books such as
'Matigari' were seized by security agents from bookshops and libraries.
Theatre groups have to be registered and each play requires a police license before each
public gathering. Scripts have also to be vetted before performance is allowed to be
staged. Some of the plays that have faced the wrath of the censors include a French
translation of 'Can't Pay, Won't Pay' and 'The Swords of Kirinyaga by Oby
Obyerodhiambo.
The libraries in Kenya which grant access to public are either controlled directly or
indirectly by the government or corporation e.g. the Kenya National Library Service,
University libraries, those run by ministries, etc. A book can be ordered or removed from
the shelves by the censor without the librarian asking why.
Kenya Library Association is the professional body comprising of Kenya librarians. It has
not fully addressed itself to the issue of censorship or the Library Bill of Rights like its
colleagues in the developed countries. Decisions and policies will affect the need of
better access to information and the ability to disseminate information to Kenyan citizens.
The media industry opposes the governments position and favours self-regulation. It set
up the Media Council of Kenya in 2002 to pursue this aim, resolve complaints and
improve journalistic standards. The Council has also drawn up a code of practice for
ethical journalism.
The Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act, 2008 is a Kenyan Act of Parliament
that was passed by the 10th Kenyan Parliament and signed into law by President Mwai
Kibaki on January 2, 2009. It is a controversial amendment of the Kenya communications
Act, 1998 which gives the state power to raid media houses and control the distribution of
content. It also gives the government the right to:
The bill was opposed by Media houses and the Kenya Union of Journalists and the
President had to form a team to look further into the contentious issues which were to be
used to censor or gag the media.
In February 1995, the government banned all past, present and future issues of
Inooro, a new weekly publication of the Catholic Church. Inooro had been published
in the Kikuyu-language and distributed in the Central and Rift Valley Provinces as
well as in Nairobi.
In December 1994, members of the government made two public attacks on the
Nation Newspaper group the largest in the region with a daily circulation of some
200,000.
First, President Moi warned the group against thinking that it was too large to be
touched:
"This newspaper can be banned and its licence revoked." Then, the Minister for
Information and Broadcasting, Johnstone Makau, threatened to ban Nation
newspapers "if they continue with irresponsible journalism".
On 1 February 1995, two armed men burst into the offices of Finance magazine,
doused it in petrol and set it on fire. Ruth Gathiga, secretary to the publisher, Njehu
Gatabaki, was assaulted with a gun butt by one of the attackers. Finance had only
resumed publishing in October 1994, after a sustained campaign of legal harassment
by the government had temporarily forced it off the streets.
knowledge that no-one will know who they are (not even KACC) unless they choose
to reveal their identity.
According to the Daily Nation story Whistleblowers Computer Link Cut which
quotes the KACC spokesman, Nick Simani, a few Government departments are
trying to monitor or restrict access to the KACC system by government computers.
Some senior officials have instructed IT personnel to monitor civil servants visits to
forbidden web pages such as those of the KACC corruption reporting system. Until,
we have a whistle blowing law in Kenya such behaviour by Government (as
suspicious as it looks) is not illegal. Whistle blowing legislation will come, and it will
criminalize such behaviour, because Kenya signed and ratified the United Nations
Convention against Corruption on December 9th 2003 and is therefore obliged to
make what these senior officials are doing illegal. In the meantime, KACC should put
its foot down and publish the names of the Government Departments involved.
On 2nd March 2006, hooded men raided the Standard and KTN offices in the
Companies head offices and printing plant and destroyed publications. Thereafter,
the then Minister for Internal Security, while speaking on the press said that the
operation was a matter of state security and was in effect conducted by and with full
knowledge of the government. Subsequent reports from the media alleged that the
raid was to stop publication of damaging information on the first family.
Legislative provisions like the Secrets Act and Seditions Act are also some of
censorship initiatives that have been instituted by the government.
10
Nuru, which was published in eight Kenyan languages, was impounded by the police,
Who subsequently threatened newspaper vendors with arrest if they were found selling
the publication.
3.5 Immorality
The government has previously tried to censor selling of information materials especially
those of pornographic nature to curb the impact on morality. The elastic quality of a
standard such as pervasiveness could be used to justify censorship of any form, even
books and newspapers which also pervade society
4. METHODS USED IN CENSHORSHIP
Three major means of direct censorship are preventive in nature. Their goal is to stop
materials deemed unacceptable from appearing, or if that is not possible, from being seen
or heard by prohibiting their circulation:
Formal pre-publication review requires would-be communicators to submit their
materials for certification, before publicly offering them. Soon after the invention of the
printing press, the Church required review and approval before anything could be printed.
However impractical and difficult to enforce in the contemporary period, to varying
degrees such prior restraint is found in authoritarian societies, whether based on secular
political (as in Cuba) or religious doctrines (as in Iran and Afghanistan ) at the turn of the
century. It may be seen in democracies during emergency periods such as a war. There
may be formal review boards or censors may be assigned directly to work at newspapers
and broadcasting stations.
Government or interest group monopolization of publication. Here the censors in
effect are the producers and are the only ones allowed to offer mass communication. For
much of its history the church was intertwined with government and in effect was the
only publisher. In the former Soviet Union the press and media were government
controlled and private means were prohibited.
11
12
by the police, who subsequently threatened newspaper vendors with arrest if they
were found selling the publication.
The Kenya Communications (Amendment) Bill, 2008 bill, Official secrets Act,
Seditions Act, Freedom of Information Legislation is all legislations that have a
bearing on censorship.
13
14
6. CHALLENGES TO CENSORSHIP
1. The Internet
While government censorship makes a symbolic statement, it is often rather impractical
beyond the short run, given the ubiquitous nature and continual improvements in mass
communication technologies and the leaky nature of most social systems. Of course
computer based technologies may make it easier to track whom an individual
communicates with and what material they access. But on balance, technology appears
more likely to be on the side of freedom of expression than the side of the censors. The
ease of modern communications, in particular remote forms whose transmission can
transcend national borders such as the radio, television, fax and the internet and means of
reproduction that are inexpensive and relatively easy to use and conceal such as photocopiers, scanners, audio and video taping and printing through a computer, limit the
ability of censors. The internet, if available, has the potential to make everyone a
publisher. Its many to many communication through labyrinthian networks (chat
rooms, bulletin boards and e-mail) is far more difficult to censor than the traditional one
to many communication of the newspaper or television station.
Given the expanding scale of published material and the diffusion of communications
technology that began with the printing press, government and religious bodies are
forever trying to catch up. This is the case even in modern highly authoritarian settings.
For example in China during the Tiananmen Square protest, fax technology kept China
and the world informed of the events. In Iran the fall of the Shah was aided by smuggled
audio tapes urging his overthrow. Strong encryption which protects messages also makes
the censors task more difficult.
This incident shows clearly, that some people in the Government of Kenya are afraid that
internet whistle blowing can bring accountability to bear in frightening ways. They are
right to worry. Technology is making whistle blowing easier and safer and there is even a
Kenyan precedent.
15
2. Public demand
Increasing public demand for reforms and access to freedom of expression is steadily
challenging government efforts to enforce censorship. Beyond technical factors,
censorship is often accompanied by demand for the censored material. Censoring
material may call attention to it and make it more attractive (the forbidden fruit/banned in
Boston effect). Black market demand for such material makes it likely that some
individuals will take the risk of creating and distributing it, whether out of conviction or
for profit. Potential communicators often find ways to avoid or deceive censors whether
using satire, parable, code language, changing the name of prohibited publications and
through simply defying the law, as with the many underground samizdat presses that
challenged communist rule in Eastern Europe.
It is also the case that sometimes, the truth will out. In a democracy illegitimate
political censorship in the name of National Security or executive privilege is vulnerable
to discovery note Watergate and the Iran-Contra affair. In spite of its dependence on
government sources, the mass media may play an important counter-balancing role here,
watching those who seek to watch. Beyond investigative reporters often using the
Freedom of Information Act, such dirty data may be revealed by the legal procedure of
discovery in court cases, by leaks, experiments or tests, whistleblowers and participants
with a Dostoyevskyian compulsion to confess and by uncontrollable contingencies such
as accidents (e.g., the crash of an airplane carrying Watergate hush money). The more
complex and important a cover-up or illegal conspiracy, the more vulnerable it is to
revelation. Even most legitimately classified government secrets have a shelf life and
must be revealed after 75 years.
In the long run it is also difficult for censors to deny pragmatic outcomes and those which
are empirically obvious. This raises the intriguing sociology of knowledge question of the
relationship between culture with its significant, but not unlimited, elasticity and a level
of reality or truth that, when in conflict with culture, may erode it over time. No matter
what the power of the Church to prosecute Galileo for heresy and ban his work, or the
16
amplitude of its megaphone to assert the earth was flat, it could not suppress the truth
for long.
3. Freedom of Information
The Constitution already guarantees freedom of expression in Section 79:
Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his
freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions without interference,
freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate
ideas and information without interference (whether the communication be to the public
generally or to any person or class of persons) ... .
17
REFERNCES
The Kenya Anti Corruption Commission & Internet Censorship in Kenya an Exercise in
Futility May 29th, 2008 by Mars Group Kenya
UNHCR (1995) Censorship in Kenya. Government critics face the death penalty
available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4753d3ba0.html
IFLA/FAIFE (1999) World Report: Libraries and Intellectual Freedom
http://www.ifla.org.sg/faife/report/kenya.htm
Baets, A. ( ) Cesnorship of a historical thought. Greenwood Publishing Group
Fox News (2008) Jerome Corsi in Kenya: Censored, Detained, deported?
http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2008/10/jerome-corsi-in-kenya-censored-detained.html
International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2001. Censorship and
Secrecy, Social and Legal Perspectives http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/cenandsec.html
http://www.kenyalaw.org/Downloads/Bills/2008/THE_KENYA_COMMUNICATIONS_
AMENDMENT_%20BILL%202008_2.pdf
18