The unchecked application of the Prevention of Terrorism Act is eroding public trust and risks weakening Kenya’s criminal justice system, legal and security experts have warned.

Former Law Society of Kenya (LSK) President Eric Theuri now says many terrorism charges lack the compelling evidence needed to sustain convictions, raising the likelihood of cases being dismissed in court.

Frequent withdrawals of charges, or dismissals, Theuri says, only make a mockery of the police, prosecutors, and judicial officers. 

“Acts of terrorism including destruction of property, killings, and all other ingredients of that charge are in the law. The law states that if the destruction of property arises from a situation of riot or a demonstration then it is not defined as terrorism even though it possesses ingredients that constitute terrorism,” he said while on Spice FM on Wednesday, July 23. 

On Monday, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) dropped terrorism charges against activist Boniface Mwangi, opting instead to charge him with illegal possession of ammunition.

Many young suspects, however, still face terrorism-related charges following their alleged involvement in the June 25 and Saba Saba protests.

Theuri argued that these charges are politically motivated and have far-reaching consequences for suspects, including reputational damage and potential placement on terror watchlists.

“We, perhaps, need a system where you have a court that is able to review those charges or the investigations, especially for serious offences. The Judiciary would be able to sieve and most of these charges would fail without the stigma,” he said. 

He commended the Judiciary for imposing more moderate bail and bond terms, despite the seriousness of the charges.

Security expert Patrick Osoi, trained in counterterrorism, echoed these concerns. He said the government’s justification for some terrorism charges appeared politically driven and aimed at drawing police into partisan disputes.

Osoi urged authorities to thoroughly examine suspects’ actions and intentions before pressing terrorism charges.

“Before you accuse, and arraign, people for terrorism, you need to interrogate them to determine whether they meet the threshold of being declared terrorists,” he remarked.