In a significant blow to the government’s media policy, the High Court has resoundingly declared as unconstitutional a directive that sought to channel all public sector advertising exclusively through the state-owned Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC). This landmark ruling, delivered by Justice Lawrence Mugambi, effectively nullifies the order issued by the ICT Principal Secretary, Edward Kisiang’ani, in March 2024, which mandated that all government ministries, agencies, and parastatals place their advertising solely with the national broadcaster. The court’s decisive action underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the tenets of the Kenyan Constitution, particularly those safeguarding media freedom, equality, and the principles of good governance, thereby setting a crucial precedent for the relationship between the state and the media landscape.
The High Court’s judgment hinged on the finding that the directive contravened several fundamental articles of the Constitution. Justice Mugambi meticulously detailed how the policy violated Article 10, which enshrines good governance and integrity, Article 27, which guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination, and Article 34, which protects the freedom of the media. The court reasoned that limiting government advertising to a single entity constituted an indirect form of control over the media, potentially stifling dissenting voices and undermining the independence of the press. Furthermore, the judge pointed out a critical procedural flaw, asserting that the ICT Principal Secretary had overstepped his legal authority, as the power to make such a significant policy decision regarding public procurement of advertising services rests solely with the Treasury Cabinet Secretary. This lack of legal mandate rendered the directive void from its inception, highlighting the importance of adherence to established legal frameworks in government operations.
The implications of this ruling extend far beyond a mere legal victory; it serves as a powerful reaffirmation of the critical role of a diverse and independent media in a democratic society. Had the directive been allowed to stand, it would have created an uneven playing field, unfairly disadvantaging private media houses that rely heavily on government advertising revenue for their sustainability. Critics had argued that such a policy would not only threaten the financial viability of independent media outlets, potentially leading to job losses and closures, but also limit the public’s access to a plurality of voices and perspectives. The court’s decision safeguards against the potential for government influence through financial leverage, ensuring that the media can continue to operate as a watchdog, holding power to account and providing the public with the information necessary for informed participation in national discourse.
References:
Citizen Digital High Court declares gov’t advertising monopoly unconstitutional
Nation ‘Non-existent powers’: Court quashes PS Kisiang’ani order restricting State advertising to KBC
Kenyans.co.ke High Court Rules That Kisiang’ani Directive Moving Govt Advertising to KBC is Unconstitutional
The Eastleigh Voice High Court declares ICT PS Kisiang’ani has no powers to decide who gets govt advertising
The Standard State cancels adverts to Standard Media as court set to rule on ad monopoly case