New Mitihani House building pictured on August 31, 2023, in South C, Nairobi.
The Communications Authority of Kenya last week ordered mobile phone service providers—Safaricom, Airtel, Telkom and Jamii—to temporarily block access to the Telegram messaging service.
Reasons cited were that the platform was being used to aid cheating in the ongoing national secondary school final examinations.
It is, of course, right and proper that social media platforms which are misused be taken down. Examination cheating is just one of the unacceptable practices that must be vigorously countered, alongside hate speech, incitement to violence, propagation of violent extremism, and other criminal activities.
However, powers to shut down communication channels must always be exercised with restraint, especially where they might be abused to restrict freedom of speech and communications.
In the first instance, it is unclear what suspension of Telegram is intended to achieve, as circulation of leaked examination papers can be done through so many other channels.
It is also curious that the directive limits the suspension of Telegram to specific hours daily.
What happens about examination scripts that are traded, downloaded and even printed outside those hours?
In any case suspending Telegram does not solve the problem where tech-savvy already use Virtual Private Networks get around government snoops and censors.
We have to accept that the Communications Authority, and the government as a whole, is approaching the problem from the wrong end. The problem is not Telegram, merely a communications channel, but compromised security systems at the Kenya National Examinations Council.
If there are examination papers being traded, they are obviously sourced from the body that administers the exams. The management must thus be held culpable. As long as there are dishonest people within, there will be no shortage of channels by which leaked exam papers will be circulated, even if Telegram is banned in its entirety.
Culture of theft
Another issue we must critically address is the culture of theft, fraud and dishonesty in our society. I don’t know if there is any other country in the world where the administration of primary and high school examinations must be handled as a massive security operation in an attempt to curb systemic cheating.
It is not just the students who sit the exams engaged in cheat, but entire networks that involve their parents, teachers, school administrations and even political and government administration leaders at the local level.
Exam cheating is reflection of a wider national malaise. We have a government composed largely of liars and fraudsters. Our political leaders from local to national level did not shoot their way to power; we willingly elected those despicable while fully aware of their proven propensity to theft. We cannot elect thieves to high office, and then expect them to turn into angels once comfortably sitting astride power. We are the problem that needs fixing.
Finally, we may temporarily suspend access to one messaging service, but also give serious thought to the dangerous precedent being set. Today, it is Telegram because it is being used in exam cheating. Tomorrow, it will be Tik Tok or Instagram because some religious zealot somewhere takes offense at risque content. The day after, it will be Facebook or X because some political potentate wants to ban all discussion that does not sing his praises.
Communications Authority
Let us be careful of the powers we give the Communications Authority. They have been misused and abused in the past for benefit of those wielding political power, and therefore must be firmly restricted so constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression, speech and communications are not violated.
Not too long ago during the Gen Z protests, the Authority acted outside the scope of its remit by threatening to shut down television stations that reported the truth of what was happening.
Such grave violations of basic freedoms at the behest of those wielding political power are all too common. We recall that during the previous administration, the government cited phantom national security threats to ask that the Communications Authority block live television coverage of opposition leader Raila Odinga’s installation as ‘People’s President’.
The then Director-General flatly defied the directive as it was not his job to act as a government censor.
That brave act remains a vivid illustration why such a sensitive office should always be held by a professional, rather than a political appointee.
It also reminds us that there is pending business in regard to reviewing the enabling legislation so that the Communications Authority is denied the leeway to misuse its authority.
This is particularly important in regard to the regulation of content that must remain the preserve of the independent body envisaged by the Constitution.
[email protected]; @MachariaGaitho
