NAIROBI, Kenya — The National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) has found that remarks made by Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma ahead of the August Linda Mwananchi rally were ambiguous and potentially threatening, creating a risk of political intimidation.
The commission said Kaluma’s remarks could reasonably be understood as encouraging private confrontation against people holding opposing political views.
In its findings released on Saturday, October 3, NCIC said the legislator’s speech was “intemperate, ambiguous and dangerous in its reasonably understood meaning”.
The commission said the remarks were capable of encouraging confrontation and intimidation of people holding different political opinions.
NCIC Explains Kaluma Findings
NCIC said Kaluma had made statements directing supporters to “deal with” people advocating a one-term presidency, while also referring to checking hotels and houses where individuals were staying and monitoring movements using fuel allegedly provided for the activities.
Kaluma appeared before the commission on August 31, accompanied by his lawyers, to respond to the allegations.
In his defence, the MP said he was warning residents about an alleged security threat involving armed individuals who had been brought into Homa Bay, rather than targeting people because of their political views.
He also disputed aspects of the translation of his remarks and cited video recordings, police activity and security information in support of his explanation.
Kaluma said his references to hotels were intended to encourage vigilance against illegal weapons, citing the Prevention of Terrorism Act. He denied organising or causing the violence that followed the rally and expressed willingness to participate in peace initiatives.
NCIC said it gave substantial weight to Kaluma’s security explanation and acknowledged that it was credible in material respects.
However, the commission found that the wording he used was neither necessary nor proportionate to the alleged threat.
“A genuine threat required precise warnings, referral to police and an express instruction against private confrontation,” the commission stated.
Commission Clarifies Legal Limits
NCIC said the Prevention of Terrorism Act does not authorise political supporters to enter or inspect hotels and houses, demand guests’ identities or confront occupants.
It further found that interpreting Kaluma’s remarks as authorising private coercion against political opponents would fall outside the protection afforded by Article 33 of the Constitution on freedom of expression.
The commission, however, clarified that its investigation did not establish the ethnic or racial connection required to pursue offences under Sections 13 and 62 of the National Cohesion and Integration Act.
The findings therefore did not amount to a determination that Kaluma had committed an ethnic hate-speech offence.
NCIC said Kaluma’s subsequent clarification, cooperation with the commission and willingness to participate in peace initiatives were considered mitigating factors, but did not eliminate the risks identified in his original remarks.
“Actual violence need not occur before dangerous speech warrants preventive intervention,” the commission said.
NCIC Rejects Claims Of Clearance
The commission’s findings came after reports suggested that Kaluma and Busia Governor Paul Otuoma had been cleared over remarks that had prompted NCIC investigations.
NCIC subsequently disputed that characterisation, saying its determinations found fault with aspects of the leaders’ remarks and imposed or directed corrective measures.
The commission said Kaluma’s matter was being handled through a legally provided conciliation process, while immediate orders to stop the conduct remained in effect.
It warned that failure to comply with the required corrective measures or reach a satisfactory agreement could lead to further notices and enforcement action under the law.
The findings come against the backdrop of violence that disrupted the Linda Mwananchi tour of Homa Bay in August. Claims by political groups about the causes and organisers of that violence have been contested and were not independently established in the reports reviewed.
NCIC said its determination would not interfere with independent investigations into the violence that followed the rally.
