NAIROBI, Kenya — Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi has sharply criticised Northern Kenya media practitioners for boycotting a planned interview with Ex-DP Rigathi Gachagua, terming the move an act of “journalistic cowardice.”
In a statement posted on X, Ahmednasir argued that the media had a professional duty to interview him and challenge his claims through tough questioning.
“The media cannot boycott him because they disagree with him,” Ahmednasir said. “The media expresses an opinion only when rendering an editorial. This was a mere interview — a question and answer session.”
He added that in recent weeks, Gachagua had raised what he described as a “very important national question” touching on corruption and poor leadership among political elites in the North Eastern region, matters that warranted public interrogation rather than avoidance.
“They should have interviewed him and asked him all the hard and difficult questions they had in mind,” he said. “Boycotting Hon Gachagua by NFD media is a stupid act of journalistic cowardice.”
The remarks follow a joint statement by Northern Kenya media practitioners explaining their decision to withdraw from the interview.
In the statement, the journalists said proceeding with the interview would not align with their “core principles of responsible journalism, national unity, and constructive public discourse.”
They cited concern over what they described as divisive rhetoric that emphasises ethnic and regional differences at a time when the country needs cohesion.
“We are concerned about the potential for the interview to devolve into character assassination or the dissemination of unsubstantiated allegations against individuals or institutions,” the statement read.
The practitioners said they were not assured that the discussion would remain respectful, evidence-based, and focused on substantive issues.
“As media outlets committed to ethical standards, informed debate, and peace, we cannot in good conscience provide a platform that risks amplifying harmful narratives,” they said, while acknowledging the importance of giving public figures an opportunity to address the nation.
The boycott has sparked debate within media and legal circles on the balance between editorial discretion, ethical journalism, and the press’s constitutional role in holding public officials accountable through scrutiny rather than exclusion.
Under Article 34 of the Constitution, the media is guaranteed freedom and independence, while also bearing responsibility to provide accurate, fair, and balanced information to the public.
