To combat hate and misinformation on social media in Kenya, the government directs all social media companies operating in the country to establish a physical presence.
The Kenyan government has indeed taken steps towards regulating social media operations within its borders, including directives for social media companies to establish a physical presence in the country.
The Kenyan government’s directive for social media companies to set up offices in the country is unnecessary. These companies already have policies to deal with misuse and regulate their platforms. This move looks like a desperate attempt by a regime to lose the information war.
For example, X (formerly Twitter) successfully fought similar laws in countries like India and Nigeria, where governments tried to force them to open offices. In those cases, the real aim was to silence critical voices by threatening to shut down companies that didn’t comply. These companies were not intimidated after they fought Nigeria and India and won.
This directive could be part of a bigger plan to target and close social media platforms under the excuse of non-compliance. It’s a dangerous path that threatens freedom of speech and access to information in Kenya but it will be interesting to see what Ruto will do as it looks like a losing war on his part, and another series of wrong advice that those close to him are giving him.
The Ministry of Interior and National Administration, Republic of Kenya, said in a statement, “To ensure responsibility and accountability in the face of rising disinformation, social media manipulation, and online abuse, all social media organisations operating in the country must establish a physical presence within our jurisdiction.
“This was emphasised by the Principal Secretary for Internal Security, Dr. Raymond Omollo, during a meeting with telecommunications companies and social media platform representatives.”
“The increasing misuse of social media, including harassment, hate speech, and incitement to violence, necessitates immediate and decisive measures.”
“Strict compliance with this requirement is expected with telecommunications providers and platform owners required to take stronger action against criminal activities online.”
This move is part of a broader regulatory framework aimed at managing content, protecting users, and ensuring that these companies can be held accountable under Kenyan law.
The push for physical presence is often linked to issues of jurisdiction, content regulation, and the need for direct accountability. Kenya has seen instances where social media platforms have influenced national events, particularly around election times, leading to calls for more stringent control over these platforms.
The Kenyan courts have also ruled that if a technology company has a significant presence in Kenya, such as offices or employees, local courts may have jurisdiction over content regulation matters, especially when content impacts Kenyan citizens.
There have been discussions and proposals in Kenya regarding the regulation of social media, including the requirement for social media platforms to have a physical office in Kenya.
For instance, the Kenya Information and Communication (Amendment) Bill of 2019 proposed such measures, although it’s not clear if these have been enacted into law as of now.
Establishing a physical presence would mean social media companies would need to invest in local infrastructure, comply with local laws more directly, and potentially face legal proceedings in Kenyan courts for issues like content moderation, hate speech, or misinformation.
This could also lead to more jobs within the country but might be seen by some companies as an additional operational burden.
The directive has implications for freedom of expression, data privacy, and the operational costs for tech companies. There’s also the question of how this would affect smaller social media platforms compared to giants like Meta or Twitter.
Public opinion might be split, with some seeing this as a necessary step for accountability, while others might view it as government overreach or censorship.
While the directive is clear in intention, the exact mechanisms, the timeline for compliance, and the response from social media companies would need to be monitored through ongoing news and official government announcements.
