Kenyan Police Face Legal Action Over Roadblocks During Gen Z Uprising Anniversary Protest
On Thursday, 12 September 2025, activists gathered in Nairobi to commemorate the second anniversary of the 2024 Gen Z uprising, a wave of protests that began over rising living costs and allegations of systemic corruption. The memorial march was intended to honor those who lost their lives during the demonstrations and to renew calls for governmental accountability. However, the event was disrupted by a series of unannounced roadblocks erected by the Kenya Police Service, prompting a legal challenge from the Katiba Institute, a prominent Kenyan human‑rights organization.
Background of the 2024 Gen Z Uprising
The 2024 protests erupted after a sharp increase in fuel and food prices, coupled with revelations of high‑level graft within state institutions. Demonstrators, largely university students and young professionals, took to the streets demanding economic relief and transparency. The movement reached a climax when protesters breached the perimeter of Parliament, prompting a forceful response from security forces.
According to the Kenya Police Watch, an independent monitoring group, at least 127 people were killed during the 2024‑2025 protest period, with numerous reports of excessive force, arbitrary arrests, and alleged impunity for officers involved. These findings have been cited repeatedly by both local and international rights bodies, underscoring a pattern of concern over police conduct during public assemblies.
The Roadblock Incident and Court Order
Hours before the memorial march, police set up checkpoints on major arteries leading into central Nairobi, including Moi Avenue, University Way, and Haile Selassie Avenue. The roadblocks were not announced in advance, and traffic was halted for several hours, affecting commuters, vendors, and emergency services.
Earlier that week, the High Court had issued an interim order prohibiting the police from imposing restrictions on peaceful assemblies without prior judicial approval. The order stemmed from a petition filed by civil society groups seeking to safeguard freedom of movement and assembly ahead of planned demonstrations.
Despite the court’s directive, police authorities proceeded with the checkpoints, arguing that they were acting on intelligence indicating potential criminal infiltration of the march.
Human Rights Group’s Legal Challenge
The Katiba Institute filed a contempt of court case against Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja, asserting that the police had willfully disregarded the High Court’s order. In its filing, the institute highlighted several consequences of the blockade:
- Delay of ambulances and medical response units attempting to reach injured protesters.
- Prevention of peaceful citizens from exercising their constitutional right to freedom of movement.
- Creation of a chilling effect on future public gatherings, undermining democratic participation.
The institute’s legal team, led by senior counsel with over fifteen years of experience in constitutional litigation, argued that the police action constituted a clear violation of judicial authority and posed a risk to public safety.
Government’s Justification and Security Concerns
In response, the Ministry of Interior stated that the roadblocks were a precautionary measure based on credible intelligence suggesting that organized criminal groups planned to exploit the march to loot businesses and attack civilians. Officials emphasized that the safety of Nairobi’s residents remained the top priority and that the checkpoints were lifted once the march concluded without incident.
Security analysts note that while intelligence‑led policing is a legitimate tool, its deployment must balance security imperatives with constitutional protections. The International Crisis Group has warned that overly broad restrictions can erode public trust and exacerbate tensions between citizens and state security forces.
Implications for Police Accountability
The contempt case marks a significant test of Kenya’s judicial oversight over law‑enforcement actions during public protests. Legal experts suggest that a ruling in favor of the Katiba Institute could reinforce the principle that police must comply with court orders, even when acting on security intelligence.
Moreover, the outcome may influence ongoing discussions about police reform, including the establishment of independent oversight mechanisms and clearer protocols for managing assemblies. Observers from the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights have called for transparent investigations into allegations of excessive force and for measures that ensure accountability for violations.
Conclusion
As Nairobi reflects on the legacy of the 2024 Gen Z uprising, the legal confrontation over the memorial march roadblocks underscores the ongoing struggle to reconcile security concerns with fundamental freedoms. The proceedings before the High Court will not only determine the immediate consequences for the police leadership involved but may also shape the broader trajectory of police conduct and civic space in Kenya.
