13/12/2025
There is a growing narrative that treats deepfakes purely as a technology issue, often discussed in the context of innovation or gender‑based violence in abstract terms. I hold a different view.
At its core, the malicious use of deepfakes squarely fits within cyber bullying and cyber stalking, both of which are already recognised offences under the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, 2018. When artificially generated images or videos are used to harass, humiliate, threaten, or monitor a person without consent, the harm is not theoretical — it is deliberate, targeted, and unlawful.
Deepfakes weaponise technology to invade privacy, damage reputation, and psychologically intimidate victims. Whether the target is a woman, a man, or a child, the conduct mirrors classic cyber stalking: persistent digital harassment designed to instil fear, exert control, or degrade a person’s dignity. The fact that the content is “artificially generated” does not dilute the harm; in many cases, it amplifies it.
Responsible use of technology does not and cannot extend to the creation or circulation of fabricated content intended to degrade human dignity. Article 28 of the Constitution of Kenya protects the inherent dignity of every person, and this right does not evaporate in digital spaces. Technology must remain a tool for progress, not a shield behind which abuse is normalised or excused.
Framing deepfakes only as a technological evolution risks obscuring accountability. The law is clear: digital conduct that harasses, threatens, or humiliates others attracts criminal liability. Innovation cannot outpace responsibility, and freedom of expression does not include the freedom to digitally violate another person.
Ultimately, the conversation should shift from how advanced the technology is to how responsibly it is used. Where technology is employed to harm, the law must respond firmly and without ambiguity
