UN calls for restraint in 2025-26 after deadly Kenya protests

Introduction

In late 2025 and early 2026, Kenya was rocked by some of the most intense political unrest in over a decade. Protests that began peacefully quickly spiraled into violence, leaving dozens dead and hundreds injured. As scenes of burning streets, tear gas, and chaos filled the headlines, the United Nations stepped in with a clear message: exercise restraint, protect civilians, and pursue dialogue. This article explores the origins of the protests, their impact on Kenya, the UN’s response, and what lies ahead for the country.

For more:  https://mzansiurbanreport.com/

Kenya, East Africa’s economic hub, has faced mounting pressure in recent years due to a combination of political, economic, and social factors. Heading into the 2026 general elections, trust in government institutions had sharply declined. Allegations of electoral fraud in previous elections, rampant corruption, and rising public debt contributed to widespread disillusionment.

At the same time, inflation surged in 2025, hitting the poor and middle class especially hard. Youth unemployment remained staggeringly high — over 35%, according to local estimates — and basic services like healthcare and education were increasingly out of reach for many.

This volatile mix of grievances created the perfect storm.

The protests began in Nairobi in November 2025, led primarily by youth and civil society groups demanding government accountability, electoral reforms, and immediate economic relief. At first, these gatherings were largely peaceful. Protesters carried banners calling for transparency and chanted slogans denouncing political elites.

But the mood shifted dramatically when police used live ammunition and tear gas to disperse crowds. Tensions escalated further in cities like Kisumu and Mombasa, where clashes between demonstrators and security forces turned deadly. By January 2026, more than 60 people had reportedly been killed, and hundreds more injured or detained.

There were also reports of looting, destruction of public infrastructure, and confrontations between ethnic groups in some areas — reviving fears of the 2007–2008 post-election violence.

The United Nations issued its first statement on December 3, 2025, expressing “deep concern” over the violence and urging restraint from both protesters and security forces. UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated:

“We are alarmed by the loss of life and reports of excessive force. We urge all stakeholders in Kenya to respect human rights, uphold the rule of law, and engage in meaningful dialogue.”

The UN Human Rights Council also dispatched a fact-finding team to Nairobi to assess the situation on the ground. Meanwhile, UNDP and UN Women launched programs to support peacebuilding efforts and youth engagement in political dialogue.

4. International Reaction and Pressure

Kenya’s key international partners — including the African Union, United States, United Kingdom, and European Union — echoed the UN’s message. The African Union Commission Chairperson called on the Kenyan leadership to “listen to the people and prevent further bloodshed.”

The U.S. State Department issued travel advisories and warned against the use of violence against peaceful protesters. Several embassies urged their citizens to avoid non-essential travel to affected areas.

International NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch also raised concerns over police brutality and arbitrary arrests. They called for independent investigations and for the Kenyan government to ensure accountability.

5. Government Reaction: Defiance and Concessions

President William Ruto initially struck a defiant tone, blaming the unrest on “opposition agitators and foreign interference.” However, as pressure mounted and the death toll rose, the government softened its stance.

In early February 2026, Ruto announced the creation of a national dialogue forum, bringing together representatives from government, opposition, civil society, youth groups, and religious leaders. Some modest concessions were offered, including a review of policing tactics, economic relief measures, and dialogue on electoral law reform.

Still, critics argue these steps are insufficient and symbolic, accusing the government of attempting to diffuse the crisis without addressing root causes.

6. Root Causes: Beyond the Headlines

To understand the protests, one must go beyond the violence and look at Kenya’s deeper issues:

• Economic inequality: While Nairobi has seen booming growth in tech and finance, rural areas remain deeply impoverished.
• Youth disillusionment: The majority of protesters were under 30, many of whom feel ignored and excluded from decision-making.
• Ethnic politics: Kenya’s political system often divides along ethnic lines, with elections intensifying communal tensions.
• Institutional distrust: From the electoral commission to the judiciary, many Kenyans no longer believe in the impartiality of key institutions.

These factors have brewed for years — the protests were simply the spark that lit the fuse.

7. What Comes Next?

The coming months will be critical for Kenya. If the national dialogue forum produces genuine reforms and avoids political posturing, there may be hope for healing and renewal. However, if the government fails to act on promises — or if violence resurfaces during the 2026 elections — the consequences could be dire.

The UN has promised continued engagement. Peacebuilding workshops are being supported across several counties, and early warning systems are being strengthened with the help of regional organizations like IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development).

Ultimately, long-term peace in Kenya will depend not only on political elites but on the engagement of ordinary citizens, especially young people, in building a more inclusive and accountable democracy.

The Importance of Placing Limits on Violent Protests

The right to protest is a cornerstone of democratic societies. It provides citizens with a vital platform to express dissent, demand accountability, and push for social and political change. Across history, many of the world’s most transformative movements — from civil rights to anti-apartheid to environmental activism — began with people taking to the streets.

However, while the right to peaceful assembly is protected under international law and most national constitutions, this right is not absolute. When demonstrations devolve into violence, they risk undermining the very principles they aim to uphold. Therefore, placing reasonable and lawful limits on violent protests is not only necessary for maintaining public order, but also essential to safeguarding democracy, human rights, and the integrity of protest itself.

Violent protests can lead to loss of life, destruction of property, disruption of essential services, and widespread fear among the population. When violence breaks out, it is often civilians who bear the brunt — including bystanders, local business owners, and even peaceful protesters caught in the chaos. In countries like Kenya, where recent demonstrations have turned deadly, the consequences can be especially severe.

Violent clashes between protesters and law enforcement have not only resulted in tragic deaths, but also deepened political divides, sparked ethnic tensions, and destabilized communities. Without mechanisms to limit or prevent such violence, societies risk descending into cycles of retaliation and repression, making long-term reconciliation and reform increasingly difficult.

Placing limits on protest violence does not mean suppressing dissent or criminalizing free expression. Instead, it means establishing legal and institutional frameworks that distinguish between peaceful assembly and acts of aggression. International human rights law, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), explicitly allows states to impose restrictions on assembly when necessary to protect public safety, national security, or the rights and freedoms of others — so long as those restrictions are lawful, necessary, and proportionate.

For example, governments have the right to prohibit protesters from carrying weapons, to restrict protests in sensitive areas (like near hospitals or airports), or to intervene when violence erupts. These safeguards are designed not to stifle protests, but to ensure they occur in a manner that respects the rule of law and the rights of all citizens.

One critical reason for limiting violent protest is the need to protect democratic institutions. While protest is a key tool of democracy, when it turns violent, it can threaten the very system it seeks to influence. Attacks on government buildings, courts, electoral bodies, or the media can erode public confidence in these institutions and give rise to authoritarian responses.

For example, if protesters storm an election commission or shut down a court, it can undermine the legitimacy of democratic processes. In such cases, the government has a responsibility to intervene — not to silence opposition, but to defend the democratic order from breakdown. However, that intervention must be balanced and accountable. Excessive use of force by police or the military can inflame tensions and lead to further violence, which is why both sides — protesters and state authorities — must be bound by clear legal and ethical limits.

Another major concern with violent protest is its tendency to derail legitimate causes. When protests turn violent, the focus often shifts from the message to the mayhem. Media coverage may center on burned cars or looted shops rather than the protestors’ demands. Public sympathy can quickly evaporate. Violent actions by a few can discredit the entire movement and provide governments with a pretext to crack down on all forms of dissent, even peaceful ones.

History shows numerous examples of movements that lost momentum or legitimacy due to violence, even if that violence was carried out by fringe elements or infiltrators. As such, it is in the interest of protest leaders and organizers to set clear boundaries, promote nonviolence, and hold accountable those who incite or commit violent acts.

From a societal standpoint, unchecked protest violence also normalizes extremism and undermines social cohesion. If violent behavior during demonstrations becomes common or tolerated, it can embolden radical groups, sow fear among the public, and deepen mistrust between citizens and institutions. This can lead to a breakdown in civic dialogue, further polarization, and a loss of hope in democratic problem-solving. Conversely, when states and citizens work together to preserve the peaceful nature of protests — through dialogue, training, legal reforms, and community policing — it reinforces mutual respect and reduces the likelihood of future violence.

Technology and social media add another layer of urgency to this issue. Violent images from protests can go viral in seconds, inciting panic or retaliation, sometimes in different parts of the country or even the world. While such coverage can expose abuses by authorities, it can also inflame passions, spread misinformation, and escalate situations rapidly. This makes it even more critical for governments, media, and civil society to have protocols in place for de-escalation, fact-checking, and constructive communication during times of unrest.

That said, limits on violent protests must be carefully designed to avoid abuse. Too often, governments label any protest as “violent” to justify crackdowns, censorship, or mass arrests. This is especially true in authoritarian regimes or fragile democracies, where public assembly is already restricted. In such contexts, legal safeguards and independent oversight are essential to prevent misuse of power. National human rights commissions, ombudsman offices, and civil society watchdogs play a key role in ensuring that measures to contain violence are fair, transparent, and rights-based.

Education and civic training are also important tools for preventing violence in protest settings. When citizens — especially youth — understand their rights and responsibilities in a democracy, they are more likely to engage in peaceful forms of activism. Governments, schools, and NGOs should invest in public awareness campaigns, teaching people how to organize lawful demonstrations, engage with public officials, and avoid provocations. Police and security forces, in turn, must be trained in nonviolent crowd control methods, negotiation techniques, and human rights standards. Mutual trust can only be built through consistent, rights-based behavior on all sides.

The Importance of Peaceful Protest in Criticizing Corruption and Holding Governments Accountable

In any functioning democracy, the ability of citizens to gather, speak out, and peacefully protest is a fundamental right that protects freedom and fuels reform. Among the most vital uses of this right is to challenge corruption and demand transparency from governments. Peaceful protest serves as a powerful tool for the people to voice discontent with leadership that abuses its power, mismanages resources, or betrays public trust.

It allows societies to resist authoritarian drift, advocate for justice, and build a culture of accountability. Without the ability to peacefully protest, democratic values begin to erode, and corrupt systems are left to flourish unchecked. Therefore, peaceful protest against government corruption is not just an exercise of civil liberty — it is a civic duty essential to the survival of democracy and the protection of human dignity.

Corruption undermines public institutions, weakens the rule of law, and steals from the people — especially the most vulnerable. When officials embezzle funds meant for healthcare, education, or infrastructure, it is citizens who suffer from poor services, failing systems, and missed opportunities. In many parts of the world, corruption has become normalized, treated as an unfortunate but inescapable part of politics.

This normalization, however, only occurs when people feel powerless — when they believe they cannot challenge the system or demand better. Peaceful protest disrupts this apathy. It empowers citizens to reclaim their voice and to say, “Enough is enough.” From local rallies to national marches, peaceful protest can awaken public consciousness, unite people across class or ethnic lines, and put pressure on leaders to change course.

Historical examples highlight the transformative power of peaceful protest in confronting corruption. In India, anti-corruption movements led by civil society figures like Anna Hazare mobilized millions and led to new anti-graft laws. In Romania, in 2017 and again in 2019, massive peaceful demonstrations forced the government to backtrack on legislation that would have weakened anti-corruption enforcement. In South Korea, peaceful candlelight protests against a corrupt administration ultimately led to the impeachment and imprisonment of a sitting president. These examples show that when citizens come together peacefully to demand accountability, even powerful and entrenched political forces can be held to account.

One of the most important features of peaceful protest is its moral clarity. Violence, even when motivated by righteous anger, can blur the message and alienate potential supporters. Peaceful protest, by contrast, centers the message on justice, fairness, and shared values.

It demonstrates to the broader society — including international observers, the media, and potential allies — that the protest is not about destruction, but about democratic renewal. This moral stance can be especially effective when facing corrupt regimes that use violence or propaganda to maintain control. A peaceful movement is harder to delegitimize; it forces those in power to answer difficult questions rather than dismiss the movement as lawless or radical.

Moreover, peaceful protest often generates far-reaching political and legal consequences. It can prompt internal investigations, legislative hearings, or resignations. It can inspire whistleblowers to come forward, investigative journalists to dig deeper, and international organizations to intervene. In many cases, what begins as a small peaceful protest can evolve into a national reckoning.

Peaceful demonstrators often carry more than signs — they carry evidence, testimonies, and a collective memory of wrongdoing. They remind society that corruption is not invisible or victimless; it has names, dates, and consequences. By giving voice to those harms in public spaces, peaceful protest forces the nation to confront its own conscience.

Importantly, peaceful protest also builds civic culture. It creates spaces for education, dialogue, and solidarity. When people come together to march against corruption, they are not just opposing something — they are practicing democracy itself.

They learn how to organize, how to communicate, how to challenge authority without hatred, and how to build bridges across divides. This kind of civic engagement strengthens democratic institutions in the long run, making societies more resilient against future corruption or abuse of power. Young people, in particular, benefit from being part of peaceful protest movements, as they become more informed, more empowered, and more committed to public service.

Of course, peaceful protest is not always easy. In many countries, protesters face intimidation, arrest, surveillance, or even violence. Authoritarian governments often try to criminalize protest, label critics as enemies of the state, or manipulate the law to suppress dissent. In such environments, the act of protesting peacefully becomes even more courageous — and even more important.

When corrupt leaders fear peaceful protest, it is because they understand its power. They know that even silent marches or symbolic gestures can erode their legitimacy and expose their misconduct to the world. The courage of peaceful protesters, especially under repression, becomes a beacon of hope to others living in fear.

Technology and social media have made peaceful protest even more powerful in the fight against corruption. A single video from a demonstration can go viral, galvanizing international attention and prompting pressure on corrupt officials. Online platforms allow organizers to mobilize quickly, share stories, publish data, and hold leaders accountable in real-time. Digital tools have helped transform local protests into global movements, where solidarity and support cross borders. Yet, these same tools must be used responsibly to avoid spreading misinformation or inflaming tensions. Responsible digital activism paired with disciplined, peaceful protest can be an unstoppable force for anti-corruption reform.

Peaceful protest is not a magic solution, and it cannot solve corruption overnight. Deeply entrenched systems often fight back. But peaceful protest is a starting point — a public declaration that the people are watching, that they care, and that they are willing to act. It is often the first step in a long process that includes legal action, policy reform, institutional rebuilding, and cultural change.

Without that first step, however, nothing else follows. Silence allows corruption to grow. Passive acceptance allows injustice to thrive. But peaceful protest breaks the silence and demands something better.

Governments should not fear peaceful protest — they should embrace it as part of a healthy democracy. Leaders who are committed to serving the public should welcome criticism, investigate wrongdoing, and work with citizens to improve governance. When governments try to suppress peaceful protest, they send the message that they have something to hide. In contrast, governments that allow protest, protect protestors’ rights, and respond constructively show their commitment to transparency and accountability.

In conclusion, peaceful protest is one of the most effective, ethical, and democratic ways for people to speak out against corruption and misrule. It empowers ordinary citizens to demand justice, exposes wrongdoing, strengthens civic engagement, and contributes to long-term democratic development. Whether in a small village or a national capital, peaceful protest gives voice to the voiceless and courage to the discouraged. In a world where corruption too often goes unpunished, peaceful protest remains a light in the darkness — a sign that the people still care, and that change is always possible.

External Links and Resources

• United Nations Official Statement on Kenya Protests (Dec 2025)
• Human Rights Watch: Kenya 2025 Protest Report
• Amnesty International: Kenya – Use of Force in Protests
• African Union Peace and Security Department
• Kenya National Commission on Human Rights