Eldoret-based human rights activist Kipkorir Ngetich has come out strongly in defence of Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen, rejecting allegations by former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua that the government was supporting goons and politicising security matters.

Ngetich, speaking on behalf of the Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, said the organisation “strongly condemns” what he described as attempts to misrepresent the government’s position on public safety and security.

He argued that no government, institution or political leadership has the constitutional mandate to legitimise criminality or allow political activities to take precedence over the safety and security of citizens.

According to Ngetich, Murkomen’s recent statements should be understood as a security warning intended to protect Kenyans from possible violence and not as an attempt to suppress political expression or democratic rights.

The activist said the Interior CS was simply calling on Kenyans and political leaders to listen to security intelligence and avoid exposing themselves and their supporters to unnecessary danger.

Ngetich maintained that intelligence warnings are an important component of modern security operations because they enable authorities to identify and prevent threats before they result in loss of life, injuries or destruction of property.

He said information gathered by security agencies concerning possible confrontations, violent groups or other threats should not be dismissed simply because it comes from the government.

“Security intelligence is critical for public gatherings because it shifts security from reactive response to predictive prevention,” Ngetich argued.

He said security agencies require sufficient time to analyse available intelligence, assess the behaviour and movement of crowds, identify potential violent actors and determine the appropriate deployment of officers before large public gatherings take place.

Activist questions Linda Mwananchi rally decision

Ngetich also criticised leaders associated with the Linda Mwananchi movement for proceeding with political activities in areas where there were allegedly concerns over possible confrontations.

He argued that where security agencies have warned of a credible threat, organisers have a responsibility to consider postponing or relocating an event until adequate security measures are put in place.

The activist said political leaders should not knowingly expose their supporters to danger and later accuse the government of failing to provide security.

He described such an approach as irresponsible, arguing that the primary responsibility of every leader should be to protect the lives and welfare of the people they lead.

Ngetich further claimed that the Linda Mwananchi team should have allowed security agencies time to assess the situation and establish whether potential threats could be neutralised before proceeding with public gatherings.

He said remaining away from an identified danger zone until security agencies have secured the area is not a surrender of democratic rights but a practical measure aimed at preventing injuries and deaths.

Gachagua accused of politicising security

Ngetich also took issue with Gachagua's criticism of Murkomen, accusing the former Deputy President of politicising serious security matters.

He said Gachagua, having served in one of the country's highest constitutional offices, should understand the importance of security intelligence and the responsibility of leaders to act cautiously when warned about potential threats.

“It is a shame to see someone who was once a Deputy President politicising serious security questions that call for collective responsibility among all Kenyans, and more importantly those in leadership,” Ngetich said.

The activist urged Gachagua to avoid interpreting every statement from government officials through a political lens, particularly when the subject involves public safety.

He said political differences should not prevent leaders from working together when the lives of Kenyans are potentially at risk.

Ngetich maintained that the Interior Ministry has a responsibility to advise the public on security threats and that citizens should take such advice seriously rather than dismissing it as political propaganda.

Intelligence should guide public gatherings

According to Ngetich, security intelligence plays a critical role in determining whether public gatherings can proceed safely.

He explained that security agencies need to assess potential threats, crowd density, movement patterns, vulnerable areas and possible criminal activities before deciding how resources should be deployed.

He said early intelligence allows authorities to identify possible criminal plots and violent actors before an event begins, giving security agencies an opportunity to prevent incidents instead of waiting until violence erupts.

The activist argued that political organisers should therefore cooperate with security agencies instead of deliberately proceeding with gatherings in areas where credible threats have been raised.

He said the objective should be to create a safe environment where citizens can exercise their democratic rights without being exposed to unnecessary risks.

‘Prevention is better than reaction’

Ngetich said preventing a violent incident is far better than deploying security officers after people have already been injured or killed.

He argued that the government should not be condemned simply for issuing warnings about possible security threats.

Instead, he said, political leaders should use such warnings to engage security agencies and find solutions that allow public activities to proceed safely.

The activist maintained that postponing a rally does not necessarily amount to denying citizens their constitutional freedoms, particularly when there are genuine security concerns that require further assessment.

He said leaders have a duty to balance political rights with the equally important responsibility of protecting human life.

Ngetich further accused some political actors of shedding “crocodile tears” over security incidents after allegedly ignoring warnings issued before public gatherings.

He argued that it would be contradictory for organisers to acknowledge the possibility of confrontation and still proceed with an event, only to blame the government when security challenges emerge.

Warning against provoking confrontations

The human rights activist also alleged that some opposition leaders were deliberately proceeding with political activities in highly charged environments in an attempt to provoke confrontations and create an opportunity to accuse the government of failing to provide security.

He said such political tactics, if used, could place ordinary Kenyans at the greatest risk because supporters and members of the public are often the first casualties when political confrontations turn violent.

Ngetich called on political leaders to exercise restraint and avoid statements or actions that could heighten tensions.

He said leaders should remember that their supporters trust them and may follow their instructions even when doing so exposes them to danger.

North Eastern example

Ngetich also used the example of possible security threats in parts of North Eastern Kenya to illustrate why intelligence warnings should be taken seriously.

He questioned whether a responsible political leader would insist on holding a public rally in an area where security agencies had warned that an event could potentially attract violence or a terrorist attack.

He argued that the same principle should apply to all parts of the country regardless of the political affiliation of the organisers.

“If there is credible intelligence pointing to a possible threat, leaders should first think about the safety of the people before thinking about political mileage,” he said.

Ngetich said security agencies should be given an opportunity to investigate threats, identify vulnerabilities and put appropriate measures in place before public gatherings are allowed to proceed.

Calls for collective responsibility

The activist called on both government and opposition leaders to embrace collective responsibility in matters of national security.

He said political competition should not prevent leaders from cooperating with security agencies when the safety of citizens is at stake.

Ngetich also urged Kenyans to remain vigilant and follow lawful security advice whenever authorities issue warnings concerning public gatherings or potential threats.

He said citizens should not be encouraged to ignore security warnings simply because they are politically inconvenient.

According to him, the protection of life should remain the highest priority whenever political rallies, demonstrations or other large public events are organised.

Defending Murkomen

Ngetich ultimately maintained that Murkomen was right to caution Kenyans and political leaders against exposing themselves to potentially dangerous situations.

He said the Interior CS's responsibility includes advising the public on security threats and coordinating national security agencies to prevent violence.

The activist dismissed claims that such warnings automatically amount to an attempt to suppress political activity, arguing that the government has a legitimate responsibility to ensure that public gatherings take place in a secure environment.

He urged political leaders to stop treating every security advisory as a political attack and instead work with authorities to find practical solutions.

Ngetich said Kenya cannot afford a situation where political differences become more important than the safety of citizens.

He called for dialogue between government officials, opposition leaders, security agencies and organisers of public gatherings to ensure that political activities are conducted peacefully.

He further urged leaders to avoid inflammatory rhetoric and instead encourage their supporters to remain peaceful, law-abiding and respectful of security directives.

Ngetich concluded that political power should never be used to encourage Kenyans to disregard credible security warnings, saying the country's leaders have a collective responsibility to protect lives and maintain peace.

He maintained that the government's security agencies should be allowed to undertake threat assessments and put preventive measures in place before large gatherings, insisting that “prevention is always better than reaction” when human lives are at stake.