William Getumbe, an Eldoret-based artist known for his controversial song “Yesu Ninyandue,” is taking legal action against the Kenya Films Classification Board (KFCB) after the board banned his work and demanded a payment of KSh243,200. Getumbe’s legal challenge highlights the tension between artistic expression and regulatory oversight in Kenya, particularly concerning the country’s moral, religious, and legal boundaries regarding media content.
The Background: A Controversial Artist and His Work
Getumbe first gained widespread attention in early 2024 for his provocative music tracks “Yesu Ninyandue-Imejaa” and “Yesu Ninyandue-Nyonga.” These songs went viral, primarily on platforms like YouTube, not just because of their catchy beats but due to the nature of the content, which some labeled as blasphemous and offensive. The titles of the songs, which loosely translate to “Jesus is Mine,” sparked significant controversy in a country where Christianity holds a dominant cultural position.
While the music became a topic of conversation on social media, so did Getumbe’s accompanying videos, which featured what KFCB described as explicit and offensive content. The videos allegedly contained nudity, vulgar language, and themes deemed inappropriate without proper age restriction or classification.
KFCB’s Actions: Arrest and Demand for Payment
The trouble for Getumbe began on March 13, 2024, when he was arrested at his home after failing to pay the KFCB’s fees related to filming and licensing. According to the Kenya Films Classification Board, Getumbe had uploaded his videos to YouTube without first obtaining the necessary approvals. This, the board argued, was a violation of the Film and Stage Plays Act, which requires that all publicly available media content in Kenya go through classification to ensure it aligns with moral and ethical standards.
On February 29, 2024, Getumbe received a demand letter from KFCB, signed by the board’s communications manager, Nelly Muluka Oluoch, on behalf of acting CEO Paskal Opiyo. In the letter, KFCB stated that the videos violated regulations because they were blasphemous and contained indecent material, none of which had been submitted for classification. The letter went on to demand KSh243,200, breaking down the amount into KSh190,000 for licensing, KSh38,000 for filming, and KSh15,200 for classification.
KFCB gave Getumbe a seven-day notice to pay the fees and remove his content from all platforms. Failing to do so, they warned, would lead to further action, including his arrest. By the time of his arrest on March 13, Getumbe had not complied with the board’s directives, and the viral status of his work only heightened public interest in his case.
Legal Battle: Getumbe’s Lawsuit Against KFCB
In response to KFCB’s actions, Getumbe filed a petition with the High Court on March 6, 2024. In his petition, Getumbe argues that the Kenya Films Classification Board, along with its CEO, is infringing on his right to freedom of expression as protected by the Constitution. He claims that KFCB’s decision to ban his content and demand payment discriminates against him as an artist, singling him out for creating provocative material that other artists may have similarly explored without facing such severe penalties.
Getumbe’s petition emphasizes that his content, although controversial, is a form of artistic expression and should not be subject to the kind of censorship and financial punishment imposed by KFCB. He points out that the ban on his content extends across multiple platforms, including YouTube, TikTok, Twitter, and Facebook, effectively halting his ability to continue his work or generate revenue from his creative efforts.
Moreover, Getumbe contends that KFCB’s decision to issue the fines and block his content was done arbitrarily and without due process. He argues that as an artist, he was not given adequate opportunity to defend his work or comply with the regulatory requirements before his arrest.
Artistic Freedom vs. Moral Policing
Getumbe’s case raises significant questions about the balance between artistic freedom and moral policing in Kenya. The country has a history of grappling with the role of the government in regulating media content, particularly content that touches on sensitive topics like religion, sexuality, and political criticism. KFCB has been known to take a firm stance on such content, often invoking the need to protect societal values and maintain public decency.
However, critics argue that the board’s actions sometimes verge on censorship and infringe on the constitutional rights of artists to express themselves freely. The Kenyan Constitution, in Article 33, guarantees the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to seek, receive, or impart information or ideas. While this right is not absolute, and can be limited for reasons such as national security or public morality, the restrictions must be reasonable and justifiable in a democratic society.
In Getumbe’s case, his legal team argues that KFCB’s actions represent an unreasonable overreach. The board’s ban on his content and the significant financial penalties levied against him, they claim, are disproportionate to any potential harm caused by his work. Furthermore, they argue that the process by which KFCB arrived at its decision to ban his content lacked transparency and fairness, raising concerns about due process and equal treatment under the law.
The Role of the Kenya Films Classification Board
KFCB, established to regulate film and broadcast content in Kenya, operates under the Film and Stage Plays Act, which requires all media content to be classified according to age appropriateness. This is designed to protect minors from exposure to inappropriate material and ensure that content aligns with Kenya’s societal values.
Over the years, KFCB has taken a hardline stance on content it deems to be in conflict with the country’s moral and ethical standards. From banning films with LGBTQ+ themes to blocking music videos considered too explicit, the board has positioned itself as a guardian of public decency. However, KFCB’s actions have also attracted criticism for being overly conservative and limiting creative freedom in a country where the arts are becoming an increasingly important platform for social commentary and engagement.
Conclusion: The Road Ahead
William Getumbe’s lawsuit against KFCB is set to be heard, with the first mention scheduled for April 29, 2024. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how far the Kenyan government, through KFCB, can go in regulating content and limiting freedom of expression. For artists like Getumbe, the case represents a fight for their right to push boundaries and explore controversial subjects without fear of legal or financial reprisal.
At its core, this case is about the intersection of artistic expression, government regulation, and societal values in modern Kenya. The question is whether the country is willing to allow room for artistic innovation and controversy or if it will continue to enforce strict moral guidelines at the expense of creative freedom. As the case moves through the courts, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for Kenya’s creative community and the future of media regulation in the country.
