Kenya Insights

Tag: Gachagua

  • “You Cannot Go to Streets and Expect Police to Kiss You” – Kenyans Remind Gachagua of Past Remarks on Protest Crackdowns

    “You Cannot Go to Streets and Expect Police to Kiss You” – Kenyans Remind Gachagua of Past Remarks on Protest Crackdowns

    Former Deputy President’s current criticism of police brutality contrasts sharply with his previous support for violent suppression of demonstrations

    NAIROBI, Kenya – Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua finds himself in an uncomfortable spotlight as Kenyans resurrect his past statements defending police brutality against protesters, following his recent criticism of the government’s violent crackdown on demonstrations.

    The controversy erupted this week after Gachagua condemned the government’s handling of peaceful protesters who were demonstrating against the killing of teacher and blogger Albert Ojwang.

    In a strongly-worded statement on his X account, Gachagua described the police action as “one of the lowest moments of our post-independence Kenya.”

    However, Kenyans were quick to remind the former Deputy President of his dramatically different stance just 12 months ago, when he was still in government and actively defending similar police actions.

    The Contradiction Exposed

    (Click to watch the video)

    10ab55b756bf5e4d1f931ed066eceb15c61a00fe

    In July 2023, while serving as Deputy President under William Ruto’s administration, Gachagua had defended brutal police action against protesters with the now-infamous statement: “You cannot go to the streets destroying property and expect police to come kiss you.”

    Speaking during a tour of Murang’a County alongside President Ruto, Gachagua had urged security officers to “stay put and not be bothered by criticism from the opposition,” effectively giving police carte blanche to use force against demonstrators.

    The stark contrast between his past and present positions has not gone unnoticed by the Kenyan public, who have flooded social media with reminders of his previous statements supporting the very actions he now condemns.

    During his tenure as Deputy President, Gachagua positioned himself as President Ruto’s primary defender, taking a hardline stance against any form of dissent.

    He famously declared: “Whoever is planning something against President Ruto should be prepared to face me because that is my job. My work is to protect him.”

    His transformation from government cheerleader to fierce critic began after his impeachment in October 2024, following what he described as a betrayal by his former boss.

    Since then, Gachagua has emerged as one of the administration’s harshest critics, exposing what he calls the government’s “corruption and nepotism.”

    Recent Events Spark Fresh Criticism

    The latest controversy stems from the government’s response to protests following the death of teacher Albert Ojwang.

    During the demonstrations, a vendor named Boniface Mwangi Kariuki was shot at point-blank range by a police officer and remains hospitalized after undergoing a second surgery to remove bullet fragments.

    Gachagua’s response to this incident marked a complete reversal of his previous position: “It is uncivilized to sink our nation into an international shame by a clueless regime that has no value and dignity for human life,” he posted on social media.

    The revelation of Gachagua’s contradictory statements has sparked intense public debate about political opportunism and the authenticity of his current opposition stance.

    Many Kenyans have questioned whether his newfound concern for human rights is genuine or merely a product of his political circumstances.

    Social media users have been sharing clips and quotes from his time in government, highlighting statements where he urged police to continue their work without being “bothered by criticism from protesters and the opposition.”

    This isn’t the first time Gachagua’s past statements have come under scrutiny since his impeachment.

    His journey from being Ruto’s “main defender” to launching the Democracy for the Citizens Party (DCP) to challenge the president in 2027 has been marked by a complete ideological reversal on multiple issues.

    During his time in office, Gachagua had even defended the government’s heavy expenditure on presidential travel and maintained that President Ruto would enjoy “a smooth sail to power” in 2027, despite opposition criticism.

    The controversy goes to show a broader issue in Kenyan politics about the consistency and credibility of political leaders who dramatically shift positions based on their current circumstances.

    It also underscores the power of social media and public memory in holding politicians accountable for their past statements.

    As Gachagua continues to position himself as a champion of human rights and democratic freedoms, his past endorsement of police brutality serves as a reminder of the political calculations that often drive such transformations.

  • 32 Petitioners Challenge Kindiki’s Position as Deputy President, Seek Gachagua’s Reinstatement

    32 Petitioners Challenge Kindiki’s Position as Deputy President, Seek Gachagua’s Reinstatement

    A fresh legal battle has erupted over Kenya’s Deputy Presidency, with 32 petitioners filing court applications seeking to remove current Deputy President Kithure Kindiki from office and potentially reinstate his predecessor, Rigathi Gachagua.

    The petitioners have launched a two-pronged legal strategy that could plunge the country into a constitutional crisis.

    First, they are seeking the recusal of the three-judge bench currently hearing consolidated petitions related to Gachagua’s impeachment, citing bias against Justices Eric Ogolla, Anthony Mrima, and Fridah Mugambi.

    Simultaneously, a separate group of five co-petitioners is pushing for Gachagua’s immediate reinstatement based on what they argue is a still-valid court order from October 18, 2024.

    Justice Mwongo of the Kerugoya High Court had originally suspended the Senate’s resolution to impeach Gachagua and blocked the appointment of his replacement.

    The petitioners’ argument hinges on a recent Court of Appeal ruling that declared the three-judge bench improperly constituted by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu.

    According to lawyer Stanley Matiba, representing the petitioners, this ruling renders “all resulting proceedings, including the lifting of Justice Mwongo’s orders and the swearing in of Prof Kindiki void ab initio (from the beginning).”

    This legal interpretation suggests that if the original Kerugoya court order suspending Gachagua’s impeachment remains valid, then Kindiki’s appointment and subsequent swearing-in as Deputy President would be constitutionally invalid.

    The legal maneuvering raises the unprecedented possibility of Kenya having two individuals with claims to the Deputy Presidency simultaneously – a scenario not contemplated in the Constitution.

    The petitioners argue that Kindiki’s continued occupation of the office “undermines the authority of the judiciary, contravenes the Constitution, and erodes public confidence in the rule of law.”

    David Mathenge, a ward representative in Kirinyaga County, along with four other co-petitioners, insists that Gachagua’s potential reinstatement transcends personal preference and serves the broader interest of upholding judicial authority and constitutional order.

    Notably, Gachagua himself has indicated he is no longer pursuing reinstatement.

    Rigathi Gachagua.
    Rigathi Gachagua.

    His legal team informed the court that he now prefers to have his impeachment quashed entirely and seeks compensation, including unpaid salaries and benefits for the remainder of his term.

    However, the five co-petitioners argue that the decision to return to office is not Gachagua’s alone to make, emphasizing that his reinstatement is necessary to preserve the sanctity of court orders.

    The 32 petitioners are demanding that the current three-judge panel recuse themselves, arguing they are “irredeemably biased” due to their role in allowing Kindiki’s unconstitutional swearing-in.

    They seek an expanded bench of at least five judges to handle what they describe as novel constitutional issues, including allegations that Kindiki was appointed without proper parliamentary vetting and questions about whether he properly resigned from his previous position as Cabinet Secretary for Interior.

    The legal drama unfolded as the court reconvened to reorganize hearings of consolidated petitions after Chief Justice Martha Koome regularized the composition of the judicial panel.

    The cases now involve complex questions about judicial authority, constitutional succession, and the proper procedures for removing and replacing senior government officials.

    The outcome of these proceedings could have far-reaching implications for Kenya’s constitutional order and the independence of the judiciary, particularly regarding the enforcement of court orders involving high-level political disputes.

    As the legal process continues, Kenya faces the unusual situation where the legitimacy of its second-highest office remains under intense judicial scrutiny, with competing legal interpretations threatening to create an unprecedented constitutional standoff.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

  • Gachagua Abandons Reinstatement, Demands Hefty Payout Over ‘Unlawful’ Impeachment

    Gachagua Abandons Reinstatement, Demands Hefty Payout Over ‘Unlawful’ Impeachment

    Former Deputy President abandons reinstatement bid, now seeks full five-year compensation package

    NAIROBI, Kenya – Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has dramatically shifted his legal strategy, abandoning his quest for reinstatement and instead demanding substantial financial compensation from the government over what he terms his “unlawful” impeachment.

    In a significant turn of events at the High Court on Thursday, Gachagua’s legal team, led by senior counsel Paul Muite, sought permission to amend their original petition to pursue monetary damages equivalent to what the former DP would have earned during a complete five-year term in office.

    “The petitioner wishes to challenge the legality of his impeachment and will be seeking leave to amend the prayers. He will be asking for the money he would have earned had he served the full five-year term,” Muite informed the court during proceedings.

    The move represents a strategic pivot from Gachagua’s initial legal challenge, which primarily focused on overturning his removal from office and securing his return to the deputy presidency. The former DP’s legal team made it clear they would no longer pursue any declarations for reinstatement.

    Muite emphasized the personal nature of the case, distancing it from broader public interest considerations.

    “This petition is not a matter of public interest. It is a personal matter that directly affects the petitioner, who is the one impeached,” he stated.

    The lawyer also indicated that no interlocutory applications would be filed, requesting the court to schedule the earliest possible hearing dates to expedite the matter.

    Notably, the government respondents in the case did not oppose Gachagua’s application to amend his petition, potentially clearing the path for the revised legal challenge to proceed without initial procedural hurdles.

    While the exact amount Gachagua is seeking has not been disclosed, the compensation package for a full five-year deputy presidential term would likely run into tens of millions of shillings when factoring in salary, allowances, benefits, and other entitlements associated with the office.

    The deputy president’s position comes with substantial remuneration, including basic salary, housing allowances, transport benefits, and various other constitutional entitlements that accumulate significantly over a five-year period.

    The change in legal strategy suggests Gachagua’s legal team may have assessed their chances of securing reinstatement as limited, opting instead for what they perceive as a more viable path to financial redress.

    By framing the impeachment as unlawful, Gachagua is essentially arguing that his removal violated due process, entitling him to compensation for the financial losses incurred as a result of what he claims was an illegal action by the state.

    Gachagua’s impeachment marked a significant political development in Kenya’s recent history, with the former DP becoming the first deputy president to be removed from office through parliamentary proceedings under the current constitutional framework.

    The impeachment process attracted widespread public attention and political commentary, with various stakeholders offering differing views on the legality and propriety of the proceedings.

    The court is expected to rule on the application to amend the petition in the coming days, which would then pave the way for substantive hearings on Gachagua’s compensation claims.

    If successful, the case could set a significant precedent regarding the financial liability of the state in cases where constitutional officers challenge the legality of their removal from office.

    The matter highlights the complex interplay between constitutional law, political processes, and individual rights in Kenya’s evolving democratic framework.

  • Gachagua Calls For Boycott of Mt Kenya Musicians Who Visited Kindiki’s Home, Demands Apology Calling Them ‘Traitors’

    Gachagua Calls For Boycott of Mt Kenya Musicians Who Visited Kindiki’s Home, Demands Apology Calling Them ‘Traitors’

    Former Deputy President threatens economic sabotage against artists who met with current DP at Karen residence

    Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has launched a scathing attack on Mount Kenya musicians who recently visited Deputy President Kithure Kindiki at his Karen residence, branding them “traitors” and demanding they apologize to Kenyans or face a comprehensive boycott.

    Speaking during a church service at AIPCA Kihoya in Kangema Constituency, Murang’a County on Sunday, May 25, 2025, Gachagua escalated his rhetoric against the artists, threatening to organize economic sabotage that would effectively end their careers.

    “We are very sad that some of our artistes have become traitors for the community. They were invited at Karen by Mr Moneybags and told to come and lie to you that SHA (Social Health Authority) is working,” Gachagua declared to the congregation.

    The former Deputy President claimed he had consulted with community elders before making his public pronouncement, adding weight to his ultimatum.

    “I sat down with elders and they told me to announce that the artistes should apologise,” he stated.

    Gachagua outlined a multi-pronged approach to pressuring the musicians, targeting their income streams and public platforms:

    “If they do not apologise, we should stop listening to their music. They should also not be invited to the entertainment joints where they go. If club owners call such a person, customers should shift to another place. Also, unfollow them on social media,” he instructed his supporters.

    The threat extends beyond individual consumer choices to organized economic warfare against entertainment venues that would host the artists.

    This represents an unprecedented escalation in Kenya’s political discourse, where a former high-ranking official is openly calling for coordinated economic sabotage.

    Gachagua’s anger stems from what he perceives as the musicians’ willingness to endorse government policies during their meeting with Kindiki.

    He accused them of being instructed to “tell us that roads are being built and education is running smoothly” in exchange for financial incentives.

    The former Deputy President also made serious allegations against Kindiki personally, claiming his “hands were filled with blood” due to his role as Interior Cabinet Secretary during the 2024 Gen Z protests, when several demonstrators were killed by police.

    The Karen meeting

    The controversial meeting took place at Kindiki’s Karen residence, where the Deputy President hosted various musicians and producers primarily from the Mount Kenya region.

    According to official reports, the discussion focused on the economic potential of the creative sector, supportive policies, and intellectual property rights protection.

    Among the notable attendees were popular musicians Samuel Muchoki Ndirangu (Samidoh), Ben Githae, Karangu Muraya, Jose Gatutura, DJ Fatxo, and Ngaruiya Junior. Several MPs from the region also attended, pledging legislative support for the creative economy.

    Backlash

    Samidoh and DP Kindiki during the meeting with Mt Kenya musicians.
    Samidoh and DP Kindiki during the meeting with Mt Kenya musicians.

    The political fallout has been swift and brutal for the musicians involved. Social media platforms erupted with criticism from fans who accused the artists of “selling out” and abandoning their supporters for political gain.

    Samidoh, one of Kenya’s most popular Mugithi artists, issued an emotional public apology acknowledging the depth of anger directed at him.

    “I am asking for your forgiveness,” he posted on social media.

    “I have seen your anger over my visit to Karen. I’ve received thousands of messages, most of them filled with insults and hate, and it has left me deeply hurt.”

    The artist revealed the personal toll of the controversy, “I am truly struggling, and this situation has pushed me towards depression.”

    He explained that he believed the meeting was meant to promote Mount Kenya musicians rather than serve as a political endorsement.

    Jose Gatutura also defended his attendance, emphasizing his role as an entertainer who serves fans across political divides.

    “I have fans from both sides, and I’m supposed to entertain all without being choosy,” he wrote, clarifying that artists depend on gigs to make a living and that the meeting focused on government support for the music industry.

    Unprecedented political weaponization

    Gachagua’s call for boycotts represents a concerning development in Kenya’s political landscape, where entertainment and arts are being weaponized for political purposes.

    The threat to organize consumer boycotts and pressure entertainment venues creates a dangerous precedent that could stifle artistic freedom and economic opportunities for creatives.

    The controversy highlights the delicate position of artists in Kenya’s polarized political environment, where any engagement with political figures can be interpreted as endorsement and lead to severe backlash from opposing camps.

    As this story continues to develop, it remains to be seen whether the musicians will issue the apologies Gachagua demands or whether they will resist what many view as political intimidation of the creative community.

    The outcome could have lasting implications for the relationship between politics and entertainment in Kenya.

  • ‘Do Not Start a War, Focus on Your Political Age Mates Like Ichungwa, I’m Your Senior,’ Kuria Warns Gachagua

    ‘Do Not Start a War, Focus on Your Political Age Mates Like Ichungwa, I’m Your Senior,’ Kuria Warns Gachagua

    A political confrontation has erupted between President William Ruto’s Senior Economic Adviser Moses Kuria and former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, with Kuria warning Gachagua against starting a political war he “cannot win.”

    The exchange began when Gachagua, addressing supporters in Kangema, Murang’a County on Saturday, claimed that Kuria’s Chama Cha Kazi (CCK) party was among several political outfits allegedly controlled by President Ruto, whom he referred to as “Kasongo.”

    “Kasongo has planned to launch many parties, Moses Kuria’s party is his, that of Kiunjuri is also his, and that of William Kabogo. He is further planning to start two new parties here in Murang’a,” Gachagua told his supporters.

    The remarks prompted a swift and stern response from Kuria, who took to social media to defend his party’s independence and remind Gachagua of their political history.

    “I formed Chama Cha Kazi in August 2021. We have elected MCAs in several counties including Nairobi, Kiambu, Nyandarua and Embu,” Kuria stated, emphasizing that CCK is a legitimate national outfit with elected officials across multiple counties.

    In his pointed rebuke, Kuria recalled how he had attempted to convince Gachagua before the 2022 elections that they should approach Ruto with their own political parties, similar to the strategy employed by Musalia Mudavadi, Moses Wetangula, Alfred Mutua, and Amason Kingi.

    “You refused and on Live TV you called my party a briefcase party. You said we should trust William Ruto unconditionally,” Kuria wrote, suggesting that Gachagua had undermined him and other CCK candidates during that period.

    The tension between the two Mt. Kenya leaders appears to stem from their differing approaches to regional politics, with Kuria accusing Gachagua of trying to “vandalize parties we have nurtured for 4 years when you were blindly in love with William Ruto.”

    Kuria concluded his statement with a warning that has now become the talk of political circles: “Do not start a war you cannot win. Focus on your political age mates like Kimani Ichungwa. I am your political senior my friend. Respect your elders.”

    The exchange shows growing divisions within the Mt. Kenya political landscape, where various leaders are positioning themselves ahead of future electoral contests.

  • Murkomen’s Gag Order? Interior CS Is Using the Secrets Act to Silence Gachagua and Muturi

    Murkomen’s Gag Order? Interior CS Is Using the Secrets Act to Silence Gachagua and Muturi

    A fresh storm is brewing in Kenya’s political landscape, and at its center is Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen.

    He has invoked the rarely used Official Secrets Act, a move widely seen as an attempt to silence Gachagua and Muturi, two of the Kenya Kwanza administration’s most vocal critics.

    Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua and former Attorney General-turned-Public Service CS Justin Muturi have increasingly spoken out against alleged corruption and human rights abuses under President William Ruto’s government.

    Now, Murkomen’s stern warning signals a deepening crackdown on whistleblowers within government ranks.

    Murkomen’s Gag Order? Interior CS Is Using the Secrets Act to Silence Gachagua and Muturi
    Former DP Gachagua has taken a firm stand against what he calls the “capture of state institutions” by a shadowy elite. He has also accused the Ruto administration of orchestrating politically motivated arrests and ignoring the rule of law. [Photo: Courtesy]

    Murkomen Wields the Secrets Act Against Dissent

    Interior CS Kipchumba Murkomen shocked lawmakers and the public alike when he told the National Assembly’s Administration and Internal Affairs Committee that government officials who leak classified information would face severe consequences under the Official Secrets Act.

    Murkomen’s comments were not made in a vacuum. They came after Saku MP Dida Rasso raised concerns over recent disclosures made by Gachagua and Muturi.

    These disclosures include explosive claims ranging from enforced disappearances to coercive diplomacy and mega-corruption deals allegedly backed by top government figures. Murkomen reminded Parliament that all public officers take an oath of secrecy.

    “There are those who are older but do not abide by the Act,” he said in a thinly veiled jab at Muturi and Gachagua. “There are attendant consequences to this.” He insisted that leaking classified information reflects poorly on any person entrusted with public office.

    He cited Section 3 and Section 20 of the Official Secrets Act, which provides for up to 14 years in prison for unauthorized disclosure of government information.

    These remarks sparked immediate backlash from legal experts and Muturi himself, who argued that the move contravenes constitutional freedoms.

    Yet, Murkomen stood his ground, arguing that trust and confidentiality are key to public service, and those who break this trust deserve punishment.

    The CS appears determined to use Gachagua and Muturi—once key figures in the ruling Kenya Kwanza alliance but now seen as threats to Ruto’s inner circle—as examples.

    Muturi and Gachagua: From Power Brokers to Government Critics

    Justin Muturi and Rigathi Gachagua were once close allies of President Ruto. Today, they are among his loudest critics. Their fall from grace appears to coincide with their refusal to remain silent about the inner workings of government.

    Muturi, who previously served as the Attorney General and Public Service Cabinet Secretary, has accused the National Intelligence Service (NIS) of abducting his son. He said his son was held incommunicado without charge—an act he labelled “state-sanctioned terrorism.”

    He also revealed that President Ruto forced him to sign a multi-billion-shilling tree-planting deal with the Russian government while at a foreign airport, raising serious questions about transparency and accountability.

    On his part, Gachagua has taken a firm stand against what he calls the “capture of state institutions” by a shadowy elite. He has also accused the Ruto administration of orchestrating politically motivated arrests and ignoring the rule of law.

    By targeting these two figures, Murkomen appears to be enforcing political discipline within the ruling alliance.

    Justin Muturi [Photo: Courtesy]

    Critics Warn of a Return to Authoritarianism

    The decision to lean on the Official Secrets Act—a law dating back to colonial-era Kenya—has alarmed many civil society groups and legal experts.

    Lawyers David Ochami and Anthony Musau have strongly condemned the tactic, arguing that it undermines the 2010 Constitution’s guarantees of freedom of expression and the right to access information.

    “The law is being misused to silence dissent and punish transparency,” said Musau. “We are witnessing the shrinking of democratic space, right before our eyes.”

    The Constitution, they argue, protects whistleblowers who expose corruption, abuse of power, or gross misconduct.

    By invoking a 14-year prison sentence for disclosing public interest information, Murkomen is not protecting state secrets—he is protecting those in power.

    Muturi himself has been defiant, telling reporters, “I will not be intimidated. I served this country with integrity, and I will not allow threats to silence the truth.”

    Gachagua, too, has remained outspoken, recently dropping a string of damning allegations against the Ruto administration during a night interview that stirred political debate across the country.