Majority of Kenyans rejected Ruto’s Cabinet but were ignored

 

Nominated cabinet secretaries

A House committee report tabled after Cabinet Secretary nominees’ vetting exercise last week says only 187 of the more than 1,300 affidavits submitted supported President Ruto’s picks for CS positions.

A support base of not more than 10 per cent of the voice of the people raises serious concerns about the credibility of the Cabinet that has already been sworn into office.

The nominees were sworn in on Thursday at State House amid growing questions from the public, which even manifested in a round of Gen Z demonstrations, albeit on a low scale, against the Ruto administration. 

A majority of the affidavits, over 800, questioned the suitability of the nominees to hold office especially after President Ruto had said the dismissal of his entire Cabinet came after “reflection, listening to Kenyans, and after a holistic appraisal.” 

“I will immediately engage in extensive consultations across different sectors and political formations, with the aim of setting up a broad-based government that will assist me in accelerating and expediting the necessary, urgent, and irreversible implementation of radical programmes to deal with the burden of debt, raising domestic resources, expanding job opportunities, eliminating wastage and unnecessary duplication of government agencies,” Ruto said.

He had bowed to pressure after nationwide protests that created the biggest crisis of his two-year presidency. 

However, as the committee report indicates, it emerges that the promised consultation did not reach far enough. It failed to consider the people’s voices raised in majority of the affidavits.

Many Kenyans, through the affidavits, opposed the reappointment of ten Cabinet Secretaries, including Salim Mvurya, Soipan Tuya, Kipchumba Mukomen, Justin Muturi, Alice Wahome, Alfred Mutua, and Rebecca Miano, who had been dismissed at the height of the Gen Z demonstrations. 

Ninety-seven affidavits protested the appointment of Hassan Joho, Opiyo Wandayi, Wycliffe Oparanya, and John Mbadi, citing their leadership roles in an opposition party (ODM) which they argued was a threat to democracy. 

To prove their claims, the writers of the affidavits, which have not been made public despite Parliament calling for public participation, questioned why Oparanya was being appointed at a time he was facing investigations by EACC. 

“Oparanya is currently the subject of criminal investigations and prosecutions by EACC during his tenure as governor, with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions concurring with the recommendations that the nominee should be charged with an offense,” the Parliamentary report says.

The committee says it investigated the claims relating to corruption and forwarded the report to the ODPP along with charges, which included abuse of office, conspiracy to commit offence of corruption and money laundering.

“The nominee obtained conservatory orders issued by the High Court in Kakamega. The matter is pending in court,” the report said.

The chairman of the vetting committee, National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula, said the committee received over 1,300 submissions from Kenyans raising concerns about some CS nominees. He however said many were dismissed for containing insults and repetitions. He said several petitioners failed to follow the required process of submitting an affidavit to outline their objections to specific nominees.

“The rest of the submissions either generally oppose the appointment of one or more nominees; are repetitions, are filled in support of nominees or unrelated to the exercise,” Wetang’ula said on August 1.

Wetang’ula said there were instances where some Kenyans who submitted affidavits wanted to be appointed in the place of some nominees whose character they questioned. 

According to the affidavits, the current nominations consisted of 16 males and six females, which failed to comply with the Constitutional two-thirds gender rule. Furthermore, the representation of people with special interests was also excluded. 

“There was no representation of people with disabilities among the nominees as required by the Constitution,” the house report says. 

One affidavit protested that Kindiki, Tuya, Wahome, Duale, and Murkomen continued to hold office soon after President Ruto dismissed his Cabinet, which was against the law. 

“Tuya and Kindiki, although not respondents in the arbitration, continued to occupy offices after their offices became vacant under the operation of Article 103(1)(e) during the 2017-2022 term of Parliament,” the affidavit read in part. 

Another affidavit told the vetting committee that Kindiki lacked the capacity to serve as a CS as the public did not have confidence in him, he is inefficient, ineffective, and lacks transparency and accountability. 

In the report, the committee observed that the affidavit by the deponent was a written statement on oath and therefore complied with the Constitution. 

Killing of protesters

Kenyans in Canada also protested the appointment of Kindiki, citing the killing of protesters by police, which raised questions about the nominee’s competence and commitment. 

Another deponent contested the appointment of Kindiki based on allegations of abuse of power. The committee in its report to the house said “The deponent averred in his affidavit that the OCS of Magutini Police Station, acting under Kindiki’s instruction, had evicted him from his land,”  

Two other affidavits say Murkomen received Sh15 million through his law firm from Out of the Box Solutions, which were proceeds of corruption. 

“The nominee has been accused of accepting $100,000 (Sh 13,000,000) from Chinese contractors. He was arrested in Dubai for money laundering after being found with Sh280 million,” the report said. 

The affidavit, with an attached video, added that Murkomen is perceived by the public to be arrogant and opulent.  Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei who also filed an affidavit claiming a nominee collected Sh15.3 billion from a Chinese company in 2023.

Cherargei also said that Murkomen concealed from the public a concession proposal to lease Jomo Kenyatta Airport to Adani Holdings. He also proceeded with the deal without subjecting it to a public audit.

By Benjamin Imende