Editor’s note: In this piece of work, Kimutai Kirui advises youth against allowing their National IDs or their parents’ identification documents to be used for SIM card registration. Kirui argues that no promise of protection, payment, or favour is worth the risk.
If investigations arise, the registered owner will be questioned and may face significant legal and financial liability. Identity documents must remain strictly personal.
Pseudonym accounts and legal accountability
Many youths believe that hiding behind a screen, a pseudonym, or shared Wi-Fi makes them invisible—but in today’s digital ecosystem, anonymity is rarely real and rarely permanent.
Every click, login, and connection leaves traces that can converge into identity, turning what seems hidden into something fully traceable.
Youth must understand that politicians, whether elected or not, police, and elites are temporary in power; accountability is often delayed.
We may be used for a time, but once we are no longer useful—whether an officer is transferred or a regime changes—we are left on our own, often facing lasting consequences.
Many of us did not go beyond a D- in local secondary school, with outcomes ranging from basic certificates to driving school training in Eldoret or cyber training, and some now working as political goons
Always remember that, beyond legal liability, your social media activity can directly affect your future career.
Many people are denied visas because of their online conduct. Social media is now part of your CV. You do not need a criminal record to be denied a job or visa—your social media footprint alone may be sufficient.
Many social media abusers have previously evaded criminal liability or civil suits, but that is changing. You will be taken to court.
When that time comes, you and your pseudonymous account will stand alone—no trends, no comments, no crowd support.
That era of impunity is ending.
Cyberbullying, harassment, and defamation are not protected speech. You will be prosecuted.
Legal counsel may downplay exposure for fees, but liability remains. Social media crowds may project impunity, but in court there are no trends or commentary—only evidence, procedure, and accountability under law.
Anonymity online is not disappearance—it is delay.
The question is rarely if identity will be revealed but when digital traces will converge.
Fraudsters and cybercriminals often rely on borrowed or stolen identities. In many informal settlements and rural areas, vulnerable youths unknowingly allow their IDs to be used for SIM registration, exposing them to risks linked to fraud, harassment, and defamation.
Some of those involved are tied to political mobilisation networks or organised criminal groups, with alleged links to security actors.
How do these goons operate on social media
A chief orchestrator on social media often leads small paid networks to spread insults and defamatory content, sometimes through pseudonymous accounts that others amplify.
On WhatsApp, every account is tied to a phone number—often registered under false, borrowed, or vulnerable identities, including deceased persons or unsuspecting individuals.
The publication and circulation of defamatory or criminal content remains unlawful. Repetition does not create protection; amplification carries equal legal consequences.
Political patronage within security structures can create informal networks where influence, enforcement, and criminality intersect. In such systems, accountability is weakened through selective enforcement, protection, and institutional compromise.
Where online abuse persists, it is often not due to lack of capacity but issues of integrity. Impunity is sustained through protection and system design rather than invisibility.
In the digital world, very little is truly untraceable. Investigations are often delayed by influence or interference, not technical limitation.
The illusion of anonymity
Anonymity online is conditional, not absolute. Pseudonymous accounts operate within systems that generate traceable signals.
Attribution emerges from multiple layers:
- SIM registration tied to providers such as Safaricom and Airtel
- Device and browser fingerprints
- Platform metadata and login patterns
- Behavioural patterns and OSINT signals
- Even VPNs only obscure visibility temporarily rather than eliminate traceability.
Identity is reconstructed, not discovered—built from overlapping digital traces.
Wi-Fi and the myth of anonymity
Shared Wi-Fi is not anonymity. It only changes how traces appear.
IP addresses are only one layer
Platforms retain behavioural and login data
Activity is continuously logged and correlated
Shared networks do not prevent identification
Final reality:
Wi-Fi does not create anonymity.
It only masks it temporarily. In most cases, digital activity leaves multiple layers of evidence that can be connected when required.
The author is Kimutai Kirui, a Kenyan political analyst and human rights activist known for his work in Uasin Gishu County, where he has championed justice in cases ranging from police brutality to land disputes affecting widows.
Views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not represent the editorial position of news9.africa.
Discussion about this post