Nairobi, Kenya – Kenya’s Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen on Monday defended the decision to charge recent protesters under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, rebuffing critics who called the move excessive. Murkomen urged the public to recognize that the violent acts committed during the June and July demonstrations – including burning police stations, stealing weapons, and torching administration blocks – fit the legal definition of terrorism.

“If you invade a police station and burn it, steal guns and burn police lines and houses, beat a police officer, ban courts, ban administration units, burn vehicles, burn people’s businesses, what is the crime?” Murkomen challenged, asking why such destruction should not be treated as terrorism. He said that mobilizing gangs or financing individuals to destroy property under the cover of protest also constitutes terrorism, not just legitimate demonstration.

The CS contrasted the current charges with common perceptions of terrorists, noting that extremists are not always remote or hooded figures. He argued that anyone orchestrating attacks on government institutions, regardless of their appearance or location, falls under the terrorism law. On the same day, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) issued a statement backing the charges, stressing that they met legal thresholds and were meant to protect national security, not suppress free expression.

The government’s stance has deepened an ongoing debate in Kenya over the boundaries of protest. Opponents of the terror charges, including some opposition politicians and rights groups, maintain that the arrests criminalize dissent. Murkomen asserted that charging suspects under anti-terrorism statutes was justified by the severity and coordination of the attacks, which he said aimed to cripple public order. His remarks signal that authorities will continue treating property destruction during unrest as a serious threat to Kenya’s security.