By Janet Nyakundi & Kenneth Nkonge
Millenials and those from older generations will remember John Kiarie’s role as prominent figure in “Redykyulas”, a legendary Kenyan sketch comedy group widely recognized as the pioneers and godfathers of modern Kenyan stand-up comedy. Formed in the late 1990s at Kenyatta University, the trio revolutionized the country’s entertainment landscape by daringly using political satire to mimic senior government figures during a highly restrictive political era.
The trio, Walter Nyambane, Tony Njuguna and Kiarie, who is now the Dagaoreti South MP, introduced sharp political satire. At a time when criticizing or mocking the President carried immense personal risk, their sketches—particularly Nyambane’s presidential impersonation alongside bodyguards and political sycophants—became a national sensation.
Also Read
As an arts student, Kiarie may not have known that one day he would become a politician himself and lead the National Assembly’s Departmental Committee on Communication, Information and Innovation. The committee oversees the information, communication, technology, and broadcasting sectors.
He was recently heard saying: “Na hawa wachoraji katuni hufikiria aje? Wakiona nafasi wazi ni kuchafua na ama sketch tu?” (And how do these cartoonists think? Whenever they see an opening, they use it to discredit someone and sketch them?) This captures the uneasy relationship between political leaders and cartoonists who use satire to comment on public affairs.
Featured on September 24 by Taifa Leo on the page 9 cartoon, Kiarie’s reaction provides an opportunity to examine the place of political cartoons in journalism and their role in scrutinising public power. There is a need to go beyond highlighting the politician’s criticism and open a discussion on why cartoons remain part of newspaper journalism.
Political cartoons use humour, irony, exaggeration and symbolism to comment on current affairs. Through a single image, a cartoonist can draw attention to a political decision, public statement or issue affecting citizens. Their simplicity can make complex issues easier for readers to understand, while allowing audiences to question those exercising public authority. In this sense, cartoons provide another form of commentary through which newspapers can examine public affairs and engage readers beyond conventional news coverage.
Satire comes with responsibilities. Cartoons are imagery, which can affect how a public figure or issue is perceived. A politician may view a particular depiction as unfair or insulting, while readers may see the same image as legitimate criticism. Kiarie’s reaction therefore raises an important media practice issue: how can cartoonists exercise creative freedom while ensuring their work remains focused on matters of public interest? Political leaders and public institutions are legitimate subjects of scrutiny, particularly where their decisions and actions affect citizens, but creative freedom exists alongside the principles of responsible journalism.
The Code of Conduct for Media Practice 2025 places responsibility on media practitioners to uphold accuracy, fairness and accountability. These principles are relevant to editorial cartoons because the use of humour does not remove the need to consider whether a portrayal is based on a genuine public issue or whether it could mislead audiences about the subject being discussed. The reaction to a cartoon can also become part of the public debate, particularly when a politician challenges how they have been portrayed. This allows audiences to consider both the criticism made by the public official and the role of the cartoonist in scrutinising those in positions of authority.
The coverage moves beyond the politician’s complaint and gives readers context on the role of political cartoons in journalism. It recognises creative expression as part of media practice while also drawing attention to the responsibility that comes with portraying public figures.
Political cartoons may occupy only a small space on a newspaper page, but they can generate a wider conversation about power, accountability and the freedom of the media to scrutinise public affairs.
-Janet Nyakundi and Kenneth Nkonge are media analysts at the Media Council of Kenya (MKC). This article first appeared in the Media Observer, a publication of the Council.
