Why Kenya Is Demanding Social Media Companies To Set Up Local Offices

The government has issued a circular directing all social media companies operating within Kenyan borders to establish physical offices in the country.

The government argues that the directive aims at reducing misinformation and to enhance accountability and curb the misuse of digital platforms.

On Thursday the Principal Secretary of Ministry of Interior Dr Raymond Omollo, convened a meeting with representatives from telecommunications companies and social media platforms to communicate this policy change.

“The increasing misuse of social media, including harassment, hate speech and incitement to violence, necessitates immediate and decisive measures,” the Interior ministry said in a statement.

“To ensure responsibility and accountability in the face of rising disinformation, social media manipulation, and online abuse, all social media organizations operating in the country must establish a physical presence within our jurisdiction.”

Currently, major tech companies like Google and Microsoft have offices in Kenya but many other global social media platforms operate without local offices. This new directive will impact platforms such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and others that have significant user bases in Kenya but lack a physical presence.

The move comes amid increasing concerns over the use of social media platforms for activism and mobilization against issues like corruption, punitive taxation and the abduction of government critics.

In recent months, there has been a surge in the dissemination of comic cartoons and AI-generated images targeting President William Ruto and other top government officials.

Also Read: Why Kenya Is At Risk Of Debt Distress – IPF Report

These images have been widely shared on platforms such as Tiktok and X, leading to the abduction and subsequent release of several youths suspected of creating or sharing them.

The directive has sparked a debate about the balance between curbing online abuse and protecting freedom of expression. While the government emphasizes the need for accountability, critics argue that such measures could be used to suppress dissent and limit free speech.