In a move that has sparked widespread debate and intensified public scrutiny, the (DPP) has approved terrorism charges against 37 individuals, including Peter Kinyanjui Wanjiru (alias Kawanjiru) and Serah Wanjiku Thiga. Their alleged crime? Engaging in terrorist acts on June 25, 2025, that resulted in the destruction of various government facilities in Kikuyu, Dagoretti, and other areas.
Among the destroyed properties are Kikuyu Probation Offices, Law Courts, Sub-County Offices, Chief’s Office, Office of the Registrar of Persons, Sub-County Education Office, Sub-County Accountant’s Office, Registrar of Lands Office, and Dagoretti Police Post. The accused also face arson and malicious property damage charges.
The striking aspect of these charges is that Kawanjiru and Thiga are Democracy for the Citizens Party (DCP). This detail, coupled with the sweeping terrorism label, raises profound questions about the government's approach to the ongoing wave of demonstrations in Kenya.
The Elephant in the Room: Is This a "Terrorist Act" or a Cry for Accountability?
The prosecution argues there is no malice in these charges, insisting they are aimed at individuals who engaged in destruction. However, critics are quick to point out the disjuncture between the specific charges and the broader context of the protests.
The current wave of demonstrations is not a brainchild of a few individuals or a single political party. It is a widespread, youth-led movement – primarily driven by Generation Z – that has galvanized Kenyans across the nation. Their demands are clear:
- President Ruto's resignation: A direct challenge to the current leadership.
- Government reforms: Calls for transparency, accountability, and an end to corruption.
- End to police brutality: A reaction to the excessive force witnessed during protests, including tragic deaths like that of 12-year-old Bridget Njoki.
- Addressing the soaring cost of living: The foundational grievance that ignited the initial protests.
To label the actions of protesters, even those involving property damage, as "terrorism" is seen by many as a dangerous escalation and a deliberate attempt to delegitimize a genuine public outcry. "Terrorism" typically refers to acts intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government for political objectives, often involving extreme violence. While property destruction is condemnable, equating it with terrorism in the context of widespread, citizen-led protests, is a significant legal and narrative stretch.
The Larger Narrative: Blame Game vs. Addressing Grievances
The arrest and charging of individuals like Kawanjiru and Thiga, particularly as officials of an opposition-aligned party, feeds into a narrative that seeks to place blame on specific actors or political factions for the unrest. This approach, however, risks missing the fundamental point: these demonstrations are a symptom of deeper societal frustrations.
The Gen Z movement is largely organic, propelled by shared economic hardship, a desire for better governance, and a rejection of the status quo. Their rallying cry is not an isolated incident but a reflection of a collective disillusionment that transcends political affiliations. Should the government not be asking itself why the very citizens who elected them into power are now taking to the streets en masse, demanding accountability and reforms?
The Question of Solutions: Arrests vs. Dialogue
The court's decision to keep the suspects in custody until July 10, 2025, for a ruling on the defense team's application to bar terrorism charges, highlights the legal battle ahead. But the more critical question for the nation is: Will arrests and incarceration truly solve the underlying issues fueling these movements?
History has shown that suppressing dissent through force or legal intimidation rarely extinguishes public grievances. Instead, it often hardens resolve, deepens resentment, and can push movements underground, potentially leading to more unpredictable and volatile outcomes.
The path forward, as many observers argue, should involve:
- Active listening: The government needs to genuinely listen to the concerns of the youth and the wider populace.
- Meaningful dialogue: Engaging in good-faith discussions with representatives of the protesting groups and civil society.
- Accountability: Addressing allegations of corruption, police brutality, and implementing the reforms being demanded.
- Addressing economic hardship: Implementing tangible measures to alleviate the burden of the high cost of living.
By focusing on charges that many perceive as politically motivated, the government risks alienating a significant segment of its population and inadvertently fueling the very instability it claims to be combating.
Kenya's Crossroad: Learning from History, Shaping the Future
Kenya stands at a critical juncture. The attempts to pin the widespread protests on a few individuals or label them as "terrorism" may offer a short-term narrative control, but they do little to address the systemic issues at play. The Gen Z movement is a powerful testament to the democratic aspirations of a young, engaged population. Ignoring their voices, or worse, attempting to silence them through heavy-handed legal means, could have dire consequences for the nation's future.
The demand for accountability from the government, the very leaders elected by these citizens, is not a "terrorist act" but a fundamental pillar of a healthy democracy. How the government chooses to respond to this moment will define Kenya's trajectory for years to come. Will it be a path of genuine reform and reconciliation, or one that risks deepening divisions and escalating unrest?
