Occupy parliament: did police violate the right to protest?

 The protest was sparked by persistent demands from members of the 11th Parliament to have their salaries restored to the levels enjoyed by their counterparts in the 10th Parliament—a request deemed unsustainable and widely opposed by Kenyans. According to an Ipsos Synovate survey, 88% of Kenyans supported the protest.

Unlike the often violent protests of the past, characterized by tear gas and clashes between police and demonstrators, the Occupy Parliament protest stood out for its organization and lack of aggression. Protesters used spray-painted pigs with the names of MPs and the label "MPigs" to symbolize greed, effectively highlighting their discontent. The message was clear: it is unreasonable for MPs to demand higher pay when their salaries are already significantly higher than those of the average Kenyan.

Despite being a peaceful demonstration with all necessary permits in place, some protesters faced police brutality. Officers fired tear gas, used water cannons, and television footage captured a police officer assaulting a protester. This response, though the protest was legal, suggested that not all officers were informed or acting within the law.

The right to protest is fundamental in any civil and democratic society and is enshrined in Article 37 of the Constitution, which guarantees every individual the right to assemble, demonstrate, picket, and present petitions peacefully and unarmed.

Police Spokesman Charles Owino condemned the actions of the involved officers and assured the public that those responsible would be held accountable. He stated, “They will have to say who gave them the orders or take individual responsibility for their actions.”