I am rather disappointed by the law makers on the way they are handling this crucial Bill. Instead of discussing it in a sober manner, in the typical Kenyan style, it was reduced to a CORD/Jubilee contest. Lack of maturity by our law makers seems to be our greatest undoing. They are good at shouting at rallies and they extend the same to parliament. I am surprised CORD MPs are crying of the unconstitutionality of the bill yet only 45 of them were in the parliament when the Bill was passed. Isn't parliament their core work station? Further, these amendments were proposed by parliament committees where CORD members sits, yet they didn't oppose them at that level, at least I didn't hear them.

Anyway, do we have any serious lawyer in the house who can interrogate the Bill vis-a-vis the constitution, esp on the Bill of Rights and article 24?

Article 24: Limitation of rights and fundamental freedoms

Personally, I feel most of the amendments are perfect. However, some of them may lender the Bill useless, esp bearing in mind that the court can declare it unconstitutional(See article 23) which will just waste more time and create un-necessary confrontations.
Article 23:Authority of courts to uphold and enforce the Bill of Rights

Some of the positive amendments:

1. NIS has always said they "shared intelligence that was ignored". Now, "The spy agency would have powers to arrest and detain terror suspects whom the NIS officer 'witnesses committing serious offence, finds in possession of any object or material that could be used in commission of a serious offence or suspects of engaging in any act or thing, being in possession of anything that poses a threat to national security'" What is not clear, at least to me, is for how long they can be held, just in case one is held for one year without being taken to court. What is an appropriate timing? Is the 24hrs part of the constitution? How will this amendment augur with that?

2. We have previously complained of some media houses publishing gory pictures of terror victims. That has been addressed with "A person who publishes or causes to be published or distributed obscene, gory or offensive material which is likely to cause fear or alarm to the public is guilty of a felony and shall be liable, subject to if convicted, a Sh1 million fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, while a media house shall be fined five million shillings."" However, I wonder who shall determine what is obscene or not. How obscene is obscene? Sounds a bit ambiguous in my opinion.

3. This amendment "Any person who unlawfully convenes, organizes or promotes a public rally, meeting or processional or neglects or refused to comply with any law relating to public meetings commits and offence and shall be convicted. Apart from conviction, that person shall be held liable for any loss or damage as a result of the public rally[/i]" is in my opinion suspicious. Do we still have to seek authorization to assemble?

4. "Those found with weapons at places of worship face a jail term of 20 years," sounds okay, but hope hawatawekelewo bonoko.

5. [i]Public servants who allows terrorists in the country illegally faces a 20years jail term. Very good.

I really hope that necessary and critical consultations will happen in the committee stage to ensure we get amendments that are applicable and that will not take another year to implement by being declared un-constitutional and thus null and void. I also feel that some of our biggest challenges on security are more on leadership deficiency than legal deficiency. How will the current laws ensure that if one reports a crime at a police station its acted upon?

As per the current terrorism Act, the detention period is 90 days, 24 hrs is for the penal code, the proposed security amendment for terrorism related detention is 360 days

Let me say this without to leave you with absolutely no doubt.

There was a similar bill called the chiefs act...There was also another bill sometime back that was passed with the same speed as this one.

The particular bill was meant to ensure that Kenyans tuko pamoja na tunapendana.

It was the bill that brought the death of single party rule.

When bills are passed late at night you should be very wary.

What has the right to processions and meetings got to do with terrorism? Kweli Uhuru park can't be bombed. Is it another way of protecting Kamwana from Boniface Mwangi?

I have some parts I actually like but hell no way I can agree to a bill that basically goes against everything this constitution says and even the previous constitution.

What the hell is the meaning of gory pictures, or annoying etc? What is the meaning of terrorism? Do you know if you come and disturb me as I'm watching papa shirandula, I can call you a terrorist?

When you say that a policeman can arrest you and detain you, if he SUSPECTS....What the hell are you saying. Personally I suspect some of you have partaken in prostitution, should I now arrest you?

Listen guys

Don't ever try to compare Australian law to any law in the world. Even apartheid South Africans are shocked about some of the laws coming from those places.

Saying that American law makes you have designated places to picket is another godamn lie. In the USA, you can picket anywhere you choose. The police must give you security. All you need to tell the cops is where you are going to picket....What we call designated areas to picket.

In Kenya we are being told the lie above and then told that the OCPD will decide for you where you are going to meet. You have to be seriously stupid to allow the OCPD to decide for you that the only place you can meet is Uhuru park whilst your grievance was with safaricom.

When someone wants to kill you, they add a little more sugar to your tea.

I like this!

I read this amendment bill just before I got to bed. And I remember seeing some of the issues, or rather, objections raised by alma and others here, and probably some more objections about officers acting covertly being able to do 'anything necessary' for the sake of national security. I also wondered what would happen to me if I decided to train my friends Judo. And many other objections.

But then in my sleep I had this dream. I was at war with my brothers, and as machetes were flying across I was reciting some of these laws. I couldn't even take a shower in peace. I woke up very terrified.

So this bill's publication can be said to be gory and frightening. The overall interpretation strikes me and I see from this thread and elsewhere, that others are struck with fear. That is, it seems to break its own law.

Another significant thing I can see is that these laws seem to have been drafted to change the conditions in which terror and insecurity operates rather than to do away with the factors behind terror itself.