FEEBLE CASE AGAINST JOURNALISTS FINALLY DROPPED

UNCLAS NAIROBI 004299 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS LONDON AND PARIS FOR AFRICA WATCHERS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KDEM PREL PHUM KE SUBJECT: FEEBLE CASE AGAINST JOURNALISTS FINALLY DROPPED REF: A. NAIROBI 3726 ¶B. NAIROBI 1077 This message is sensitive but unclassified; please handle accordingly. ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: On September 29 the Government of Kenya dropped its weak case against three journalists from the Standard daily newspaper charged with publishing an alarming story in February. The three men had been arrested two days before the infamous March 2 Standard Media Raids. Although it is certainly a victory for media freedom in Kenya that the men will not be imprisoned for their report, it is still troubling both that Kenyan law allows journalists to be arrested for writing stories unfavorable to the government, and that the government would try to use it. END SUMMARY. Bittersweet Triumph -------------- ¶2. (U) Acknowledging that it had no basis, on September 29 the Government of Kenya dropped its case against three journalists from the Kenyan daily the Standard. The two editors and one reporter were arrested on February 28 in connection with a February 25 article reporting that President Kibaki had met opposition leader and presidential hopeful Kalonzo Musyoka at State House (ref B). The journalists were charged (more than 24 hours after their arrest, a violation of Kenyan law) under section 66 of the Penal Code, which prohibits the publication of "alarming articles," and released on bond. It is widely believed that the article in question was part of what prompted the government's raids on the Standard newspaper and sister television station KTN two days later. The journalists' trial began on August 14, the same day a case against two Kenya Times journalists, arrested under the same law, was similarly dropped (ref A). ¶3. (SBU) One of the arrested editors told poloff on October 3 that the government had no choice but to drop its case, as no one had ever filed a complaint against the journalists, including State House and Musyoka. In the course of the first month of the trial, the prosecution brought forth only two witnesses, both of whom, the editor explained, were men who had taken the journalists' own statements at the time of their arrest. Although relieved that the case is over, he was troubled that the colonial-era law used against him and his colleagues remains on the books. In a separate conversation, another of the three journalists told poloff he thought they were only off the hook for now, convinced the government would find another "excuse to give us trouble." Neither man expected the current government attitude towards the media to improve before the 2007 general election. COMMENT -------------- ¶4. (SBU) While observers, including the Standard itself, have rightly hailed the decision as a win for media freedom, the government's actions - arresting journalists and holding them without charges, charging them without a complaint, and leaving the case open for seven months - smack loudly of harassment. This is not to deny that journalism in Kenya could benefit from improved professionalism, as the almost certain fabrication of the offending story by someone underscores. Nonetheless, in the context of expanded civil freedoms since the end of the Moi era, it is disturbing to see so many recent attempts by the government to harass and intimidate the media. RANNEBERGER