Stop Intimidating the Inspector General of Police, Human Rights Activist Warns

 Eldoret-based human rights activist Kipkorir Ngetich has come out strongly in defense of Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja, urging Kenyans to stop what he described as attempts to intimidate and undermine the country's top police officer over security measures implemented during the recent Gen Z demonstrations.

Addressing the media on behalf of the Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Eldoret, Ngetich said the Inspector General acted within the Constitution and the law by authorizing enhanced security measures, including the establishment of roadblocks, following intelligence reports that criminal elements intended to infiltrate the demonstrations and unleash violence in Nairobi and other parts of the country.

Ngetich argued that the Inspector General has an independent constitutional mandate to make urgent operational decisions aimed at protecting the country from security threats without first seeking approval from the courts or any other institution.

"The Inspector General is constitutionally mandated to safeguard the country, protect lives and property, and maintain law and order. When credible intelligence indicates there is an imminent threat to public safety, he has the authority to act immediately. Security operations cannot wait for court directions before preventive measures are implemented," he said.

He maintained that the roadblocks established during the demonstrations were preventive security measures based on intelligence assessments and were intended to stop organized criminal groups from accessing strategic locations where they could cause destruction, attack innocent citizens, or vandalize public and private property.

According to Ngetich, criticism directed at the Inspector General risks weakening the independence of the National Police Service and creating unnecessary fear among officers tasked with protecting the public.

He warned that attempts to subject operational policing decisions to political pressure or judicial control could undermine the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

"The Constitution clearly establishes the independence of the Inspector General in commanding police operations. His responsibility is to prevent crime, preserve peace, and protect the nation. He cannot be expected to seek permission from the courts before responding to intelligence reports indicating an imminent security threat," Ngetich stated.

He further argued that the judiciary's constitutional role is to review whether police actions complied with the law after the fact, rather than directing or supervising real-time security operations.

"The courts do not conduct intelligence gathering, monitor criminal networks or coordinate security responses. Their role is to interpret the law and determine whether actions taken were constitutional, but they cannot run police operations," he added.

Ngetich expressed concern that some individuals and organizations were increasingly using the language of democracy and human rights to defend criminal behaviour.

While acknowledging that the Constitution guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to peaceful assembly and demonstration, he emphasized that those rights do not extend to acts of violence, destruction of property, looting or attacks on innocent members of the public.

"There is a dangerous trend where some people attempt to use human rights as a shield to legitimize criminal conduct. Democracy and constitutional freedoms should never be interpreted as permission to destroy businesses, burn public infrastructure, attack police officers or terrorize innocent Kenyans," he said.

The activist alleged that organized criminal groups had infiltrated otherwise peaceful demonstrations with the intention of causing chaos and exploiting the protests for criminal gain.

He argued that intelligence-led policing remains one of the most effective ways of preventing such incidents, noting that modern security operations rely heavily on intelligence analysis, surveillance technology and coordinated planning to identify threats before they materialize.

"Modern policing is intelligence-driven. Security agencies receive sensitive information from various sources and are expected to act quickly to prevent attacks or criminal activities. Waiting until violence has already erupted would amount to failing in their constitutional duty," Ngetich said.

He also cautioned against what he termed a growing culture of "weaponized activism," where legal threats and public criticism are allegedly used to discourage police officers from carrying out legitimate law enforcement duties.

According to Ngetich, there appeared to be deliberate efforts by certain groups to influence operational policing decisions through intimidation and the threat of legal action.

"What we are witnessing is an attempt to create fear within the police service by suggesting that every operational decision will automatically result in legal consequences. This is likely to discourage officers from acting decisively when public safety is under threat," he claimed.

Nevertheless, Ngetich emphasized that support for the police should not be interpreted as approval for unlawful conduct by security officers. He said police officers must continue to respect the Constitution, human rights and the rule of law while executing their duties.

"We support lawful policing. The police must always operate within the Constitution, respect human dignity and uphold the rights of all citizens. At the same time, we must equally condemn violence, organized criminal activities and destruction of property whenever they occur," he stated.

He called upon human rights organizations, civil society groups and political leaders to condemn criminal activities associated with demonstrations as firmly as they advocate for the protection of constitutional rights.

Ngetich said genuine human rights advocacy should protect both the rights of peaceful demonstrators and the rights of ordinary Kenyans to live, work and conduct business without fear of violence or intimidation.

"We cannot build a society where criminals hide behind the language of democracy and human rights. Peaceful demonstrations are protected under the Constitution, but violence, arson, looting and destruction of property remain criminal offences that must be dealt with firmly," he said.

He further encouraged Inspector General Kanja and the National Police Service to remain resolute in tackling organized political violence, saying the safety and security of Kenyans should remain the primary consideration in all security operations.

"Our cities and towns cannot be surrendered to criminal gangs operating under the cover of peaceful protests. The Inspector General should continue using intelligence-led policing to protect lives and property while ensuring all police operations remain within the law," Ngetich concluded.

Ngetich's remarks come amid an ongoing national debate over the conduct of security agencies during the recent Gen Z demonstrations. While sections of civil society, legal experts and human rights organizations have questioned the legality and proportionality of some police measures, supporters of the security operations argue that law enforcement agencies have a constitutional obligation to prevent violence, protect lives and maintain public order whenever credible security threats emerge.