Youth-led protests erupt again in Kenya over police brutality and poor governance
Your support helps us to tell the story
Read more Support Now
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Read more
Youth-led protests against police brutality and poor governance have erupted across Kenya again on Wednesday, with thousands making their way to the central business district in the capital, Nairobi.
The protests, which coincided with the first anniversary of demonstrations opposing tax hikes that left 60 people dead and 20 others missing, followed last week's rallies that demanded answers for the unexplained death of a Kenyan blogger while in police custody.
Frustration is growing, especially among Generation Z, over police violence, economic struggles, and government mismanagement.
The Communications Authority of Kenya has directed local media to stop all live broadcasts of the protests halfway through the day as President William Ruto warned that violence wouldn't be tolerated.
Many turned to social media to share updates and remember slain protesters. Others posted anti-government messages and memes. On the streets, some could be seen offering protesters water.
Here's why unrest is gripping Kenya:
Police brutality
Calls for accountability have grown louder in Kenya after a street hawker was killed during last week's protests. A Kenyan court has given detectives 15 days to complete investigations into two police officers suspected of the shooting.
This came as young people flooded social media platforms throughout the week with commemorations of protesters killed last year. At the time, Ruto apologized and vowed to end police brutality as the top police chief resigned.
'Not a single officer has been held to account,' said Hussein Khaled, a human rights activist, adding that people took to the streets 'to demand justice in terms of compensation ... arrest of those officers who were involved ... police reforms because too many Kenyans are losing their lives' to police brutality.
Economic frustration
Last year's deadly protests strongly opposed a finance bill that raised taxes significantly to address debt, putting an undue burden on young, educated people struggling with unemployment and a rising cost of living. Ruto later scrapped the bill.
Some tax proposals were reintroduced later, drawing widespread criticism and calls for Ruto's resignation, following the appointment of a new but widely criticized cabinet. A revamped healthcare levy also changed standard premiums to a progressive tax, based on income.
United Nations' data shows that 70% of sub-Saharan Africa is under the age of 30, with 67% of Kenya's young people unemployed.
'Both the health and the education sectors, which greatly affect the youth, are seemingly sinking due to misguided policies and failure to provide needed resources. At the same time, there appears to be unlimited funds for 'aristocratic' luxuries,' said Macharia Munene, professor of History and International Relations at United States International University Africa in Nairobi, referring to some state people's spending that has been strongly condemned.
Poor governance
Ruto has been accused of misappropriating taxpayer money on lavish trips, most notably the use of a private jet on his trip to the United States right before last year's protests. He apologized and dismissed ministers accused of incompetence, corruption and displays of opulence amid complaints about the high cost of living.
Meanwhile, Kenya's opposition received its share of criticism, with many saying it avoided challenging the status quo after some of its members were appointed in Ruto's new cabinet
'Enough is enough ... We are here for change, it is time for us to get our nation (back),' said protestor Sevelina Mwihaki. 'The blood that we have shed is enough."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump administration could deport immigrants to 58 other countries after Supreme Court opened door for swift removals
The Trump administration could soon deport immigrants to 58 countries that are not their place of origin, after a Supreme Court ruling earlier this week granted an emergency request to overturn a federal judge's restrictions on such removals. Human rights advocates warn that sending 'third-country' nationals to these countries could expose them to abuse and violence, and strand them in places where they have no ties and often can't speak the language. Throughout this year, as the White House pushes to rapidly deport millions of immigrants, diplomats have been lobbying at least 58 countries to accept these deportees, The New York Times reports, citing interviews with officials and diplomatic cables. So far, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Costa Rica, Rwanda, and Kosovo have agreed to such flights in varying degrees, while the State Department has already approached or plans to approach numerous other countries to reach similar agreements. Many of the potential nations are in Africa, and the list includes regimes plagued with violence, political strife, and human rights abuses, including Libya and South Sudan. An emergency ruling from the Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for such removals. In a 6-3 decision, the court's conservative majority granted an emergency request from the administration to overturn a nationwide injunction from April on removals to third countries without adequate notice but did not explain its reasoning. The court's liberal minority dissented, claiming the ruling was 'rewarding lawlessness.' A Massachusetts federal judge has accused the administration of violating the injunction when it notified a group of eight immigrants last month they would be deported in a manner of hours to South Sudan, a nation the State Department reports is plagued by slavery, kidnapping, sexual abuse, torture and extrajudicial killings. Those deportees remain at a U.S. base in Djibouti while a lawsuit over their removals plays out. States that have agreed to take third-country deportees have received financial incentives, such as a reported $100,000 payment to Rwanda to accept an Iraqi man, or a controversial multi-million dollar deal with El Salvador to house Venezuelan deportees in CECOT, a maximum security prison human rights observers have compared to a gulag. Many of the nations being considered to accept U.S. flights were named this month in the Trump administration's renewed travel ban, and the administration has reportedly offered nations on the banned list, or under consideration to be added to it, relief if they accept deportees, the Times reports. The State Department told the paper it doesn't comment on diplomatic conversations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has enthusiastically embraced the idea of sending deported immigrants to third countries as a form of deterrence. 'I say this unapologetically, we are actively searching for other countries to take people from third countries,' he said at an April cabinet meeting. 'We are working with other countries to say, 'We want to send you some of the most despicable human beings to your countries — will you do that as a favor to us?' And the further away from America, the better, so they can't come back across the border,' he said. Once they are sent to third countries, immigrants could face a range of potential conditions, from detention in prison, to housing in migrant shelters, to offers of asylum or trips back to their home countries. Immigrant advocates warned that allowing such third-country removals would open these immigrants to abuse. 'The Supreme Court's ruling leaves thousands of people vulnerable to deportation to third countries where they face torture or death, even if the deportations are clearly unlawful,' Leila Kang of Northwest Immigrant Rights Project said in a statement after the decision.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Ivanka Trump's son steals show as family arrive for Jeff Bezos' Venice wedding
Watch as Ivanka Trump arrives in Venice for Jeff Bezos ' lavish wedding to Lauren Sanchez. Ms Trump, along with her husband Jared Kushner and three children, were spotted boarding a water taxi in the Italian city on Tuesday (24 June). Their son Joseph was filmed waving to reporters from the back of a boat as the family headed towards the star-studded multi-day wedding. The upcoming nuptials have also been subject to protests from groups including Greenpeace and No Space for Bezos, who have unfurled banners across the city to object against Amazon CEO's lavish affair.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
There could be a general election much earlier than you think
For a 24-year-old Tory, then working at a website called ConservativeHome, I was unreasonably happy the morning after last year's general election. I'm not a sadomasochist. 121 MPs was far more than I'd dare hope for; as the exit poll came through, I cheered that I still had a job. Among the many that lost their seats were plenty of my party's most useless MPs, up to and including one Liz Truss. But the number one reason for me to be cheerful, as Keir Starmer waved outside Number 10, landslide majority at his back, was I knew that this new Labour Government from its very first day was cooked. For those unfamiliar with it, 'cooked' is a Generation Z expression, meaning being exhausted or overwhelmed. It can also refer to being high on marijuana, but I don't think that applies here, except perhaps to explain how Ed Miliband generates his energy policies. Why was I convinced, at the point of my opponents' ultimate triumph, that they were already as good as plucked, stuffed, and roasting in the oven? Disdain, perhaps. Keir Starmer always struck me as little more than a late middle-aged man who quite wanted to be Prime Minister but didn't really know why. But the most obvious cause was the disconnect between the mandate the Government had received, the challenges it faced, and the patience of its new MPs. Ignore the 411 seats – an anomaly of the sort first-past-the-post throws out for fun. The real stat that had my eyebrows raised was the share of the vote Labour had received: 33.7 per cent. Not only was it far below what the opinion polls had predicted – little changed from Jeremy Corbyn's glorious 2019 defeat – but it was the lowest share of the vote for any majority Government ever. For a Government coming to power promising no plan more than an oblique promise of 'change', things were likely to turn sour quickly. That was especially the case for one confronting the same structural challenges – stagnation, a broken health service, and soaring immigration – that had riven the Tories and on which voters expected swift action. So it has proved. The current stand-off between Starmer and his backbenchers over welfare cuts is emblematic of this. More than 120 Labour MPs have now signed an amendment that would torpedo the Government's plans to make it harder to claim personal independent payments. The cuts would save a paltry £5 billion – a dust speck compared to an overall welfare budget of £313 billion. But it is too much for more than a quarter of Starmer's statist MPs. For a Government with a majority larger than any Margaret Thatcher ever enjoyed to be contemplating defeat on a signature piece of legislation within its first year is extraordinary. If the Prime Minister U-turns on this, as he has over the two-child benefit cap and on winter fuel payments, it will be a humiliating admission that his MPs will never will allow him to cut spending. Not only will the markets take fright; his authority would be shot. Like Theresa May during the Brexit wars, he would be in office but not in power. Starmer could can the legislation or chuck Rachel Reeves or Morgan McSweeney to the backbench wolves, falling back on the traditional excuse of all embattled monarchs: 'I was led astray by evil advice'. But paying the Danegeld has never been known to get rid of the Dane. No successor could be expected to do much better. They are trapped between a political rock and a fiscal hard place: between legions of Labour MPs who entered politics to do anything but vote through Austerity 2.0, and a bloated state limping ever close to bankruptcy as the population ages, growth remains anaemic, and the international scene continues to darken. With Labour MPs like this, how could we ever afford the £30-40 billion that Starmer's new 5 per cent of GDP defence pledge requires? It is a nonsense. So is this Government. Not even one year in, and it is extinct. With four more years to run down, it is bereft of any positive agenda, staggering from crisis to crises and rebellion to rebellion. For Labour MPs, wasting the next four years of their lives, it is a humiliation. But for the country they are failing to lead, it is a disaster. I could say I told you so. But our plight is far too dire. Labour's first year has been miserable. But things can only get worse.
