&w=3840&q=100)
8 killed, 400 injured in Kenya anti-govt protests marking deadly 2024 demonstrations
The demonstrations, held to mark the anniversary of last year's deadly protests against a controversial tax bill, saw thousands take to the streets across the country read more
Smoke rises as protestors participate in a demonstration to mark the first anniversary of the 2024 anti-government protests that drew widespread condemnation over the use of force by security agencies, in Nairobi, Kenya, on Wednesday. Reuters
At least eight people were killed and 400 injured during nationwide anti-government protests in Kenya on Wednesday, according to the national human rights watchdog.
The demonstrations, held to mark the anniversary of last year's deadly protests against a controversial tax bill, saw thousands take to the streets across the country.
In Nairobi, police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse crowds, local media and a Reuters witness reported.
Clashes broke out between protesters and police, and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights said all eight reported fatalities were 'allegedly from gunshot wounds.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'Over 400 casualties have been reported, including demonstrators, police officers and journalists,' KNCHR said in a statement shared on its official X account.
The watchdog did not specify who was responsible for the shootings but pointed to a heavy police presence and 'allegations of excessive use of force, including rubber bullets, live ammunition, and water cannons,' which it said had caused numerous injuries.
Kenyan police spokesperson Muchiri Nyaga did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the statement from the KNCHR, Reuters reported.
An official at Kenyatta National Hospital, the capital's main medical facility, confirmed that dozens of injured individuals had been admitted.
'107 admitted, most with gunshot injuries,' Reuters quoted the source as saying, referring to rubber bullets and live rounds. He added that no deaths had been reported at KNH.
National electricity provider Kenya Power said one of its security guards was shot dead during the protests while patrolling its headquarters in Nairobi.
Large crowds were seen earlier heading in the direction of State House, the president's official residence, in scenes broadcast by Kenyan channel NTV before it and another broadcaster KTN were pulled off the air after defying an order to stop live broadcasts of the demonstrations.
Both channels resumed broadcasts later on Wednesday after a court in Nairobi suspended the order issued by the Communications Authority of Kenya.
Anger against police
Protesters torched court facilities in Kikuyu town on the outskirts of Nairobi, Citizen TV reported. Flames and thick smoke billowed from the court building in a video posted on the broadcaster's X account.
Isolated clashes were reported in the port city of Mombasa, according to NTV, with protests also in the towns of Kitengela, Kisii, Matuu and Nyeri.
Although last year's protests faded after President William Ruto withdrew proposed tax hikes, public anger has remained over the use of excessive force by security agencies, with fresh demonstrations this month over the death of a blogger in police custody.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Six people, including three police officers, were charged with murder on Tuesday over the killing of 31-year-old blogger and teacher, Albert Ojwang. All have pleaded not guilty.
Ojwang's death has become a lightning rod for Kenyans still mourning those who perished at last year's demonstrations, blamed on security forces, against a backdrop of dozens of unexplained disappearances.
'We are fighting for the rights of our fellow youths and Kenyans and the people who died since June 25… we want justice,' Lumumba Harmony, a protester, told Reuters in Nairobi.
The unprecedented scenes on June 25, 2024, showing police firing at protesters as they broke through barriers to enter parliament, created the biggest crisis of Ruto's presidency and sparked alarm among Kenya's international allies.
With inputs from agencies
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Everything is fine as long as…': Putin accuses West of encouraging separatism, attacks NATO expansion plans
Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the West of encouraging separatism in Russia and attacked NATO for increasing its defence spending citing Moscow's 'aggressiveness.' Putin said that Russia's repeated security concerns regarding NATO's activities were ignored by the West.(via REUTERS) Putin also hit out at the Western nations for repeatedly 'betraying Russia' by not honouring their promises regarding NATO expansion and resolving the conflict in Ukraine. 'No one has wished to pay attention to the Islamic State, as long as it operates against Russia. Explosions in Moscow, and all that. This is still happening today,' Putin told reporters at the Belarus capital Minsk, according to news agency PTI. 'No one wants to pay attention to this. Everything is fine, as long as it is against Russia,' the President said on the sidelines of the summit of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Also Read: Vladimir Putin offered Donald Trump 'help with Iran'. US President's reply was this "The same happened when the collective West encouraged separatism in our country, and such an instrument of the fight against Russia as terrorism," he further said. Putin also said that Russia will no longer play 'one-sided' games with the West, according to state-run television Russia Today. "Western nations have repeatedly betrayed Russia by not fulfilling their promises related to NATO expansion and resolving the Ukraine conflict,' he said. He also said that NATO is using alleged Russian "aggressiveness" to justify plans to increase defence spending and bolster its military presence in Europe. "No one is saying a word about how we've come up to the Russian special military operation," the Russian President reportedly said. He added that the roots of the conflict in Ukraine goes back decades when Moscow was "blatantly lied to" about NATO expansion. "What followed was one expansion wave after another," he stated. He further said that Russia's security concerns about the bloc's activities have been consistently ignored and met with silence. 'Isn't it aggressive behaviour? That is precisely aggressive behaviour, which the West does not want to pay attention to," he added.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Anti-Iran war protest in Washington, DC today? Here's what we know about national march
Following President Donald Trump announced US airstrikes on Iran, a coalition of anti-war, Iranian, and Palestinian organisations came together to call for a national protest in Washington, D.C. on Saturday, June 28. But with a ceasefire now in place, organizers have announced that the mass mobilization is being suspended for now. Large-scale barricades were set up around the White House and the U.S. Treasury building amid rumors of a national march protest on June 28.(REUTERS) While the march has been postponed, the organizers have said they are on high alert and will remobilize if the conflict escalates again. What did protesters demand? The national march was meant to gain national attention in light of tensions looming large in the Middle East. Protesters were set to demand an immediate cessation of US military action against Iran and an end to US support for Israel's military operation. Many feared the bombing was a misguided aggression that could escalate into a larger and deadlier war. Also Read: Large barricades erected around White House and Treasury? Video sparks speculation Who was behind the 'Stop the war' protest? The protest was being organized by the ANSWER Coalition, National Iranian-American Council, Palestinian Youth Movement, The People's Forum, CODEPINK, Democratic Socialists of America among many other organizations. The coalition was calling for a massive turnout to deliver a clear message to the White House: Stop the war before it spreads. However, videos on social media show construction crews erecting large anti-scale barricades around the White House and the US Treasury building. Netizens suggest the barricades and security could be related to July 4 celebrations; others speculate about the National March protest. Donald Trump announced ceasefire Trump announced the ceasefire between Israel and Iran on Truth Social. 'CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE! It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE (in approximately 6 hours from now, when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in progress, final missions!), for 12 hours, at which point the War will be considered, ENDED! Officially, Iran will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 12th Hour, Israel will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 24th Hour, an Official END to THE 12 DAY WAR will be saluted by the World.' 'During each CEASEFIRE, the other side will remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL. On the assumption that everything works as it should, which it will, I would like to congratulate both Countries, Israel and Iran, on having the Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence to end, what should be called, 'THE 12 DAY WAR.' This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn't, and never will! God bless Israel, God bless Iran, God bless the Middle East, God bless the United States of America, and GOD BLESS THE WORLD!' Trump added.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 hours ago
- First Post
Supreme Court ruling sparks confusion over US birthright citizenship
On Friday, the court's conservative majority approved President Donald Trump's request to limit the authority of federal judges but did not rule on the legality of his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship read more The U.S. Supreme Court's decision related to birthright citizenship led to confusion and calls to attorneys as individuals potentially impacted worked to understand a complex legal ruling with significant humanitarian consequences. On Friday, the court's conservative majority approved President Donald Trump's request to limit the authority of federal judges but did not rule on the legality of his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. This outcome has created more uncertainty than clarity around a right long interpreted as protected by the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or immigration status. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. 'There are not many specifics,' said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. 'I don't understand it well.' She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. 'I don't know if I can give her mine,' she said. 'I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality.' Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating 'an extremely confusing patchwork' across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. 'Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?' she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. 'Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason,' he said during a White House press briefing on Friday. Worried calls Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. 'He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution,' she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship. 'It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights,' said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. 'That is really chaotic.' Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. 'I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born,' she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. 'She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen,' she said. 'If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?'
