The National cohesion and Integration Act

your opinion counts on the NCIC Act of parliament against journalism practice in kenya
The National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) was formed by an Act of Parliament. The National Cohesion and Integration Act 2008 were enacted after 2007 post election violence crisis and the subsequent political negotiations. A cross section of the media played a significant role in inciting ethnic animosity prior to and during the post election violence in Kenya, and continues to do so today. You may recall with horror and fear, the negative and inflammatory role that vernacular radio stations played in polarizing communities along ethnic lines. The NCIC’s key objective and functions as stated in the Act are to “Encourage National Cohesion and Integration by promoting and facilitating equality of opportunity, good relations, harmony and peaceful coexistence between persons of different Ethnic, Racial communities in Kenya.” The NCIC was born out of the realization that long lasting peace, sustainable development and harmonious co-existence among Kenyans requires deliberate normative, institutional and attitudinal processes of constructing nationhood. NCIC envisions peaceful, united, harmonious and integrated
Kenyan society and has embarked on this role with utmost dedication and energy.

National Cohesion and integration act is more of advantageous to Kenyan media in that it prevents discrimination and ethnicity, advocates for cohesiveness among the diverse groups in the country enforce the legal provisions of national cohesion and integration act of 2008. This Act became part of the laws of Kenya following the post-election violence of 2007-2008 and is a reaction to tame persons spreading hatred especially in the areas of race, color and ethnic origins. At Sections 13, 62 and 63, use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior that is intended to stir ethnic hatred or has the effect of stirring ethnic hatred, is outlawed. Publication or distribution of written material laced with hate messages is an offense under this Act, so are shows, plays or recording of visual images of the same nature.

    

refer to the NCIC

part iii 13 (2) Any person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable to a fine not exceeding one million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both.

                              (3) In this section, “ethnic hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to color, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

.

 The fear of penalties and victimization-Journalists shun away from giving some crucial information for the public interest that may be deemed as hate speech that causes disunity to the public states that Any person who commits an offence under this Section shall be liable to a fine not exceeding one million Shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to  both. Journalists 500,000 media house 20m

v  Part iii (13) 3  In this section, “ethnic hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to color, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or

national origins.

Part iv (25) b) discourage persons, institutions, political parties and associations from advocating or promoting discrimination or discriminatory practices on the ground of ethnicity or race;

This two sections have led to killing of major newsworthy  stories t in the name of public interest - journalists have shunned away from covering some  news worth stories on ethnic grounds,  because NCIC tends to cover so much on ethnicity and hence favors some ethnic communities for instance people from one community holding hierarchical positions in one docket /department. For example governor’s offices, majority of universities staffs coming from the v.cs tribe, the recent saba saba rally that was not covered in the name of it would breed ethnic animosity.

v  part iii (13) 1 a-e (1) A person who-

            (a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material;

            (b) publishes or distributes written material;

            (c) presents or directs the performance the public performance of a play;

            (d) distributes, shows or plays, a recording of visual images; or

            (e) provides, produces or directs a programme; which is threatening, abusive or insulting or      involves  the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior commits an offence if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up.

 This has reduced aspect of interactivity- interactivity involves the communication between the audience and the media houses i.e during talk shows, news programs commenting on various topical issues in online platforms. The audience is holding back to give their opinions or facts they know about a story

v  Part iv (26)2,b shall publish the names of persons or institutions whose words or conduct may undermine or have undermined or contributed towards undermining good ethnic relations, or who are involved in ethnic discrimination or the propagation of ethnic hate;

In this case News sources are less protected- Anonymity and Confidentiality is less considered as at the moment, there is less secrecy between journalists and their news sources. NCIC together with the CCK have developed a technology that registers all the SIM cards in their databases. This ensures that communication between the two can be mastered and can later be revealed when controversy arises

Part iii  13(1) any person who has undermined or contributed towards undermining good ethnic relations, or who are involved in ethnic discrimination or the propagation of ethnic hate; this has caused

 Hinderance to freedom of speech- Journalists cannot express their views and opinions fully to their audiences, there is a threat of hate speech as the commission has not given a clear description on what is termed as hate speech.

Increase in operational costs- NCIC wants the media houses to use communication enhancement equipment such as Braille and sign language and use of indigenous languages, Kenyan Sign language, Braille and other forms of communication formats and technologies accessible to persons with disabilities. This provision will require the government to come up with a clear language policy that respects the diversity of language communities in Kenya. Similarly, the government will make legal provisions that will require media to be sensitive to people who cannot see, hear, and speak. Unlike in the past, the media will no longer make excuses to continue to ignore these provisions. Kenyan media will have to invest in appropriate technologies, personnel and programs to make this possible. This leads to more expenses in that purchasing these equipment and hiring skilled employees in that field is costly

 part vii Section 62(2) (1)  of Kenya’s National Cohesion and Integration

Act, provides that any media house that publishes utterances intended to incite ethnic hatred, violence, hostility or discrimination commits an offence.  Any person who utters words intended to incite feelings of contempt, hatred, hostility, violence or discrimination against any person, group or community on the basis of ethnicity or race, commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one million shillings, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or both.

(2) A newspaper, radio station or media enterprise that publishes the utterances referred to in subsection

 (1) Commits an offense and shall be liable on conviction to a

Fine not exceeding one million shillings

Censorship-media houses have over censored themselves because they are wary of what might happen if some information or news deemed ethnic based or inciting is aired by them they will be in for a fine or even banned to do their business. In some certain circumstances, the media need to desist from providing hate speech, negative ethnicity and ‘racists’ with a platform.

For example: where a person has been identified or labeled a hate speech Perpetrator or is under investigation or prosecution for hate speech, media Houses may chose to desist from covering such persons speech live or airing it but may chose aspects that does not constitute hate speech and include it in the body of the report read by the presenter.

Notwithstanding the media’s duty to inform the public, in certain situations (e.g. where there is on-going violence targeting members of a group), it has to be very cautious in hosting ‘racists,’ or persons that have resorted to mass violence, lest the media becomes a vehicle for the dissemination of hate speech and the promotion or glorification of violence. This is more so because with the passing of the new legislation