Interior Cabinet Secretary (CS) Kipchumba Murkomen has ignited a fresh public discourse with his recent remarks urging Kenyans to exercise restraint and, perhaps more controversially, to recognize the State's supposed "leniency" in granting them freedoms. Speaking during a breakfast event with FKF Premier League Champions at State House on Tuesday, CS Murkomen drew stark comparisons between Kenya's democratic space and what he described as more restrictive environments in other global jurisdictions. His comments come at a sensitive time, as the country anticipates renewed protests and intense scrutiny over state-citizen relations.
Murkomen lauded the perceived freedom Kenyans enjoy, particularly in expressing controversial views on social media without immediate apprehension. He cited striking examples from abroad: "In the UK, if any person tweeted or made a post saying they would be visiting Buckingham Palace, nobody would wait for them to come to the streets. They will be picked from their own houses and they will be charged. I have lived and studied in the US and if an American citizen was to write on social media, 'let us go and invade White House' the Secret Service will pick them from their homes."
He then contrasted this with the Kenyan reality, stating, "It is only in Kenya where a Citizen will say they will invade Parliament, the Judiciary, State House, and they walk scot-free and even when taken to court they will be released." While seemingly a commendation of Kenyan liberties, this perspective raises critical questions about the nature of a democratic state and the balance between security and civil rights. Is the government framing its restraint as a favor rather than an obligation under the constitution?
The CS also commended the Kenyan police service, asserting its professionalism by not actively pursuing those who have dared to march towards State House during the anniversary of the anti-Finance Bill protests. "This is one of the most professional police service on the continent. Kenya is the country that has the most difficult political environment to operate as a police officer," he noted, praising their conduct amidst challenging circumstances. However, this perspective clashes sharply with recent reports from IPOA highlighting a significant trust deficit, where 75% of complaints against the police come from the public, and ongoing concerns about extrajudicial killings and police brutality. The "professionalism" Murkomen speaks of often remains contested by a public demanding accountability for past excesses.
Murkomen also questioned the true agenda of the impending protests. He argued that the recent cases of police brutality, which have fueled public outrage and driven fresh demonstrations, are already being actively handled by the courts. "You look at the reasons that have been provided, you find people looking for every reason to come to the streets to cause mayhem and stone people's businesses," Murkomen noted, suggesting that some protests lack legitimate grounds and are driven by destructive motives. This narrative risks dismissing genuine grievances and the constitutional right to protest, painting all demonstrations with a broad brush of ill intent.
While encouraging the police service to continue observing their code of conduct to ensure Kenya remains peaceful, Murkomen's statements inadvertently underscore the ongoing tension between the government's perception of "order" and citizens' demand for "freedom."
