The Kenya Human Rights Commission has sounded the alarm over legislative and executive moves by President William Ruto’s government, warning that they threaten core freedoms enshrined in the Constitution and risk breaching the line between state and religion.

In an interview with K24 Digital on Sunday, KHRC legal advisor Nelius Njuguna took issue with a proposed law sponsored by Nairobi Woman Representative Esther Passaris that seeks to amend the Public Order Act, and President Ruto’s controversial plan to build a national prayer altar at State House.

Njuguna warned that Passaris’s proposal, which seeks to outlaw protests within 100 meters of sensitive areas and impose tougher penalties on unauthorized gatherings, could erode the right to peaceful assembly.

“Although public safety is important, this bill risks trampling on the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. Often, damage during protests is caused not by demonstrators but by rogue elements or even aggressive police response,” she said.

She argued that banning demonstrations near government institutions dilutes their intended purpose.

“Protests are meant to be visible and symbolic. Barring them from areas near centers of power weakens their effectiveness,” she added.

Njuguna said the proposed changes fail the test set out in Article 24 of the Constitution, which allows for the limitation of rights only if the measures are reasonable, necessary, and proportionate.

“This proposal is excessive and not justified in a democratic society. It fails on all three counts,” she noted.

Rather than introducing sweeping legal restrictions, Njuguna urged the government to invest in training law enforcement officers on peaceful crowd control and de-escalation techniques. She warned that criminalizing protest could stifle civic engagement and public discourse.

“Such penalties create fear and ultimately silence the public from exercising their right to protest a right guaranteed under Article 37,” she said.

The proposed bill comes in the wake of weeks of youth-led anti-government protests. Njuguna said it is understandable that Kenyans are questioning the motive behind its timing.

“It’s reasonable for Kenyans to view this as an effort to muzzle dissent,” she stated. “Our history shows how public order laws have been weaponized to quash political expression.”

Njuguna also criticized the plan to set up a permanent national prayer altar at State House, saying it could violate the secular nature of government as protected under Article 8 of the Constitution.

“While the President has a right to personal faith, establishing a religious monument within a national symbol like State House crosses a line. It suggests the state is endorsing one religion over others,” she explained.

She said such a move risks alienating religious minorities and sending the wrong message about inclusion and equal representation.

“State House is supposed to stand for all Kenyans, regardless of belief. This initiative could send a message of religious bias and exclusion,” she added.

Njuguna believes both proposals—restrictions on protests and the construction of a religious site at State House—signal a troubling direction for the country’s governance.

“These moves hint at a leadership style that is increasingly intolerant of criticism and diversity. Kenyans should be alert to the possibility of creeping authoritarianism,” she warned.

She concluded by urging citizens to remain watchful and defend the Constitution against any attempts to erode civil liberties.

“We’ve seen similar patterns in other democracies where civil rights were slowly rolled back. It’s vital that Kenyans defend the constitutional principles that protect their rights,” Njuguna said.