Nairobi Woman Representative Esther Passaris tabled the Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2025 before the National Assembly’s Administration and Internal Security Committee on July 1, 2025.
The bill, which seeks to amend the Public Order Act (Cap. 56), proposes significant restrictions on where and how public demonstrations can occur, particularly in response to recent violent protests, including the June 2024 storming of Parliament.
While Passaris argues the bill is necessary to protect critical infrastructure and ensure orderly protests, critics, including politicians and citizens, view it as an unconstitutional attempt to stifle dissent and shield the political class from accountability.
Key provisions of the bill
The Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2025 introduces several measures aimed at regulating public demonstrations:
- No-protest zones: The bill prohibits public meetings or processions within a 100-meter radius of Parliament, State House, courtrooms, and other protected areas under the Protected Areas Act. Violators face fines of up to Ksh100,000, imprisonment for up to three months, or both.
- Designated protest zones: It empowers the Interior Cabinet Secretary, in consultation with county governments, to designate specific areas for protests, effectively limiting demonstrations to predetermined locations.
- Penalties for armed protests: The bill imposes up to two years’ imprisonment or a Ksh100,000 fine for individuals carrying weapons during protests, aiming to curb violence.
- Response to recent unrest: Passaris cites the June 25, 2025, protests, marking the anniversary of the 2024 anti-Finance Bill demonstrations, as justification, noting the destruction of property, looting of supermarkets, and attacks on police stations and courts. She argues the bill protects democratic institutions and prevents “rogue actors” from turning protests into “coordinated attacks.”
Passaris defends the bill as a means to ensure protests remain peaceful and do not infringe on the rights of others.
“Order is not the enemy of democracy, but its foundation.” She emphasises the need to safeguard vulnerable citizens and critical infrastructure, such as police stations housing criminals, from being stormed.
Politicians’ reactions
The bill has sparked polarised responses among Kenyan politicians, reflecting tensions between security concerns and constitutional rights.
Several members of the National Assembly’s Administration and Internal Security Committee, chaired by Narok West MP Gabriel Tongoyo, have endorsed the bill as “timely” and necessary to restore order. Tongoyo noted that Kenya is at a “crossroads” following recent unrest, emphasising that citizens’ right to picket must be exercised responsibly.
Mandera East MP Hussein Weytan supported the bill, citing the need to protect Parliament and State House from invasions.
Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma backed the bill but suggested it be redrafted as a standalone law to avoid perceptions of tampering with the Public Order Act, arguing it addresses looting and disorder during protests.
“Nobody is safe. Anytime people can come to Parliament, go to police stations,” Kaluma stated.
The Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), Passaris’ own party, has distanced itself from the bill. Nyakach MP, Aduma Owuor, said there is a need to look into the matter soberly and also find a way of instilling values to the Gen Z other than condemning.
“I do not think that changing the public order will change anything; we must first address the realities. We need a relook into Article 37,” he said.
Kitui Central MP Makali Mulu criticised the bill’s timing, coming shortly after youth-led protests, and argued it violates Article 37 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to assemble and demonstrate.
Makueni Governor Mutula Kilonzo Jr. called it “retrogressive,” warning it could undermine democratic freedoms. Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei clarified that the bill is not government-sponsored, noting it would have followed a different legislative process if it were.
Citizens’ reactions
The public response, particularly from activists and civil society, has been overwhelmingly critical, with many viewing the bill as an attack on constitutional rights.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) Kenya condemned the bill as unconstitutional, arguing it violates Articles 37 (right to assembly) and 28 (right to dignity and access to state-held information).
ICJ’s Eric Mukoya urged Kenyans to resist through public discourse and legal challenges, emphasising that courts remain a viable avenue to block such laws. Lawyer Martin Oloo called the bill a “fear-driven response” by leaders unwilling to face accountability, arguing it insulates politicians from the public.
Many Kenyans, especially those involved in the 2024 and 2025 protests, view the bill as a reaction to the Gen Z-led demonstrations that challenged government policies, such as the Finance Bill. The storming of Parliament on June 25, 2024, and subsequent protests in 2025, have heightened public sensitivity to state efforts to regulate protests.
Global context
Kenya isn’t alone in facing this dilemma. Around the world, governments are wrestling with how to balance public safety with the right to protest.
- United Kingdom: The Public Order Act 2023 criminalises tactics like “locking on” and allows suspicion-less stop-and-searches for protest-related items. Inspired by protests from Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion, the Act has drawn fierce criticism from rights groups. Amnesty International called it “dangerous,” and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights urged the UK to reconsider.
- Australia: In New South Wales, the Roads and Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2022 was introduced after climate protesters blocked major roads. It imposes harsh penalties for disrupting transport and sparked legal challenges from rights groups.
Broader context and implications
The Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2025 comes against the backdrop of Kenya’s evolving protest culture, driven by economic grievances and distrust in governance. The 2024 protests, which saw Parliament stormed for the first time in Kenya’s history, underscored the power of youth-led movements and the government’s struggle to respond. Passaris’ bill, while framed as a protective measure, is seen by critics as a continuation of efforts to curb dissent, following the withdrawal of a similar bill by Geoffrey Ruku in 2024 due to public pressure.
Has Passaris tabled a bill before?
Esther Passaris, serving as Nairobi Woman Representative since 2017, has not been widely documented as the primary sponsor of a standalone bill prior to the Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2025. She has, however, been an active legislator, frequently contributing to debates and supporting motions, particularly on gender equality, health, and urban development.
Kenneth Mwenda
Kenneth Mwenda is a digital writer with over five years of experience. He graduated in February 2022 with a Bachelor of Commerce in Finance from The Co-operative University of Kenya. He has written news and feature stories for platforms such as Construction Review Online, Sports Brief, Briefly News, and Criptonizando. In 2023, he completed a course in Digital Investigation Techniques with AFP. He joined K24 Digital in May 2025. For inquiries, he can be reached at [email protected].
