Aasai

Nairobi Woman Representative Esther Passaris has introduced a bold legislative proposal that seeks to reshape the legal landscape surrounding public demonstrations in Kenya. Through the Public Order (Amendment) Bill, 2025, Passaris aims to impose new restrictions on public gatherings, particularly near Parliament, courtrooms, and other government-protected areas. The intention behind this proposed legislation, according to Passaris, is to safeguard critical national institutions from disruptions caused by protests or demonstrations, which may sometimes escalate into unrest or pose security threats.

The Bill proposes a strict limitation on the proximity of public gatherings to sensitive government zones. Specifically, it seeks to prohibit any public meeting or procession within a 100-meter radius of Parliament buildings, judicial premises, and areas classified under the Protected Areas Act. Passaris contends that such zones should be free from the pressure or interference of public protests to allow uninterrupted and secure operations of the state organs. This provision is seen as a preventative measure against potentially volatile crowds that could paralyze key government functions.

In an effort to ensure enforcement, the Bill outlines penalties for those who violate these boundaries. If enacted, any person found to be organizing or participating in a prohibited gathering near these sensitive sites would face a fine of up to KSh100,000, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both penalties. This underscores the seriousness with which the legislation treats violations that could compromise public order or obstruct institutional functioning.

Another key aspect of the Bill is its call for the Cabinet Secretary in charge of internal security to have the power to designate specific zones for assemblies and demonstrations, in consultation with respective county governments. This is meant to ensure that protests are organized in a controlled and secure environment without infringing on the rights of others or disrupting essential services. It places a shared responsibility on both national and local governments to identify suitable locations for civic expression.

The new amendments build upon existing provisions under Chapter 56 of the Public Order Act, which governs public meetings and processions. The current law already requires that organizers notify the police at least three days in advance of any gathering. Details such as names of the organizers, physical addresses, dates, times, and locations of the meetings must also be submitted. This process helps law enforcement to assess potential risks and prepare for crowd control and public safety.

In addition, the existing Act identifies what constitutes an unlawful assembly and the legal repercussions for those involved. The proposed amendments reinforce this by creating clearer boundaries around protected zones, thereby tightening the definitions of legal and illegal gatherings. Individuals who fail to comply can be prosecuted under the Penal Code, which could lead to longer jail terms or criminal records.

While the intent of the Bill appears to be focused on enhancing national security and institutional efficiency, it is likely to raise concern among human rights advocates and civil society organizations. Critics may view it as a potential threat to freedom of expression and the right to protest, especially if its enforcement becomes overly rigid or politically influenced. Nonetheless, it opens a new chapter in the ongoing national conversation about how to balance constitutional freedoms with state security in a modern democratic society.