A group of civil society organisations has taken the government to court, accusing it of gross abuse of power by using anti-terrorism laws to arrest and prosecute peaceful protesters.

In a petition filed before Justice Lawrence Mugambi, the groups say that more than 70 individuals were charged under the Prevention of Terrorism Act without meeting the legal standards required for such serious offences.

The petitioners ,  Midrift Human Rights Network, County Governance Watch, Foundation for Dialogue, and Youth, Arts, Development and Entrepreneurship Network, argue that the state’s actions amount to a deliberate misuse of counter-terrorism laws to silence dissent and instill fear among citizens. They have sued the Inspector General of Police, the Directorate of Criminal Investigations, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Attorney General, and the Cabinet Secretary for Interior.

Through their lawyer Wambugu Wanjohi, the organisations are asking the court to declare the arrests and charges unlawful, null, and void. They also want an order stopping the state from arresting or prosecuting any more protesters under terrorism laws.

“The court should also suspend all ongoing proceedings before the Kahawa Law Courts or any other court where terrorism charges have been instituted against protestors,” the petition states.

The case focuses on arrests made during two major demonstrations,  the nationwide protest on June 25 and the Saba Saba protests on July 7  after which more than 70 people were charged under Section 4(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

“Over 70 individuals have already been charged under Section 4(1) of the said Act, in proceedings initiated and sustained without satisfying the statutory threshold for terrorism,” reads the petition.

The organisations insist that the charges filed at the Kahawa Law Courts are not only defective but also dangerous, as they carry the risk of life imprisonment or other harsh penalties. They note that none of the legal ingredients of terrorism,  such as ideological motive, mass destruction, or use of banned weapons, were present in the protests.

“Notwithstanding the absence of requisite elements such as ideological intent, mass harm, or use of prohibited weapons, this is a misuse of anti-terrorism law,” the petition further states.

The petitioners add that the accused have suffered greatly through prolonged detention and damage to their reputation, even though they were simply exercising their right to peaceful protest. They say the state’s actions are a direct threat to the rights to freedom of expression, assembly, fair trial, and equal protection under the law.

They also raise concern over the growing hostility they face, saying their work as civic actors is being undermined despite their recognised role in the national fight against violent extremism.

“The backlash threatens the integrity of national security partnerships, civic engagement programs, and donor-funded peacebuilding efforts,” they submitted.

The petition says that if the courts do not step in, the government will continue making unlawful arrests and filing defective charges, leading to public distrust and further congestion of special courts meant to deal with genuine terrorism cases.

“Unless the court intervenes, further arrests and prosecutions are likely to proceed in a legally defective manner, overwhelming specialised courts, and eroding public confidence in the justice system,” the petition warns.

The organisations want the matter heard by a three-judge bench, saying the constitutional questions raised require serious judicial consideration.

They argue that the protests were mainly youth-led and were driven by public anger over corruption, poor governance, excessive use of police force, and the marginalisation of young people in national leadership.

“These protests were largely peaceful and constitutionally protected under Article 37 of the Constitution, but were met with excessive police force, arbitrary arrests, and prolonged detentions,” the petition adds.

The case is set for mention on August 11, when the government is expected to file its response.