WhatsApp is at the center of an argument in Kenya over hate speech

Faces behind nameless accounts online are spreading hate speeches in Kenya and the government is waging a war against it.

This war led to the arrest of two chat group administrators. The group administrators were charged for spreading hate messages on WhatsApp that was a threat to national security. Aside from that, they were also charged for spreading alarming propaganda on social media.

Kenya can count itself as part of the numerous countries, that has charged people with hate speech.

Hate speech is a criminal offence under Kenyan laws. It attracts a five-year jail term and a million shilling fine.

A recent development in the UK saw the arrest of a Facebook user for spreading hate messages against Muslims. Rwanda is another African country that has also charged various people with hate speech.

The difference in this particular case is that WhatsApp administrators have been charged. However, this is not the first time a chat group administrator has been prosecuted for hate speech. In a similar case in India, the government arrested WhatsApp administrators for offensive posts about the prime minister.

As Kenya was preparing for its general election in August hate speech was a serious bone of contention. This phenomenon heightened in the post-election period as supporters of the two opposing political groupings — the ruling Jubilee party and The National Super Alliance battled each other online.

One of the suspects allegedly shared a hate speech that threatened to slaughter members of a certain community.

READ ALSO:

The arrests become very controversial on two grounds.

First of all, the government has been criticized for violating the constitutional freedoms of expression and the media.

The second is that the WhatsApp users felt safe because of the anonymity provided by the platform. Moreover, the Kenyan authorities have shown reluctance to prosecute hate speech cases. Earlier in the year, politicians accused of hate speech were released due to lack of evidence and the absence of a supporting legal framework.