Why KDF boss Kahariri is wrong on ‘Ruto Must Go’

In breaking with the long-established tradition of secrecy, the National Intelligence Service (NIS) organised, last week, an engagement with the public. For NIS Director-General Noordin Haji, it was a rare opportunity for him to give a panoramic overview of the country’s intelligence ecosystem. 

Under the topic ‘Kenya’s Evolving National Security Landscape’, he listed the diversity and splendour of Kenya’s intelligence space. For the NIS, its rendezvous with glasnost was refreshing; or at least it should have been.

The moment of glory at the National Intelligence and Research University has, however, been stained by a comment made by one of the invited guests; Chief of the Defence Forces General Charles Kahariri. In his largely unscripted remarks, Gen Kahariri referenced the persistent “Ruto Must Go” slogan, appearing to caution against any unconstitutional change of government.

The comment has since attracted sustained rebuttal, with an overwhelming majority expressing strong opposition. For some, the CDF broke with the norm by venturing into partisan politics. For others, his comments are at variance with the law, including the Constitution. Encouragingly, the robustness of the engagement by Kenyans points to acute consciousness of democratic governance.

It is fair to hold reservation about the CDF’s pronouncement. Two things are especially worthy of particular attention—the argument that the military is charged with defending the government of the day; and the insinuation that the “Ruto Must Go” chants equate to seeking an unconstitutional change of government.

Beginning with the first, there is nothing in law that expressly provides for the role of Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) as defending the government of the day. And it is for good reason. Its defence responsibility is to “the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic”. An argument can be made that the responsibility of KDF is to the State, of which the government is part. Gen Kahariri’s argument would appear to elevate the government above the State. Viewed under the current political context, it is easy to understand the uproar.

Second: “Ruto Must Go” has become an emblem of disaffection with President William Ruto’s government. Its peak was during the Gen Z protests in June and July last year. Courtesy of the protests, President Ruto made a number of concessions, including withdrawal of the discredited Finance Bill, 2024 and reshuffling of the Cabinet.

It is conceivable, and indeed possible, that sustained protests can occasion resignation of the President. Resignation is anticipated and provided for in the Constitution under Article 146. It wouldn’t be unconstitutional if people choose to sustain protests, resulting in the resignation of the President. Demonstration by the public and resignation of a sitting President are both provided for under the Constitution.

Gen Kahariri’s statement seemed to insinuate that the only legal avenue open to Kenyans is waiting for elections in 2027. Far from it.

Mr Ogutu is a political commentator. ochiengalex84@gmail.com