Fred Matiang’i and the Perils of Power: Why His Past Casts Doubt on His Presidential Suitability

In the constantly evolving landscape of Kenyan politics, leadership is no longer just about charisma, credentials, or political affiliations—it is fundamentally about character, accountability, and respect for democratic institutions. As names continue to emerge as possible contenders for the highest office in the land, it is crucial that we scrutinize not only the promises of these individuals but more importantly, their track records. One such figure who has stirred both fear and admiration in equal measure is former Cabinet Secretary for Interior and Coordination of National Government, Dr. Fred Matiang’i.

While some hail Matiang’i as a no-nonsense enforcer of government policy and a diligent administrator, a closer inspection of his tenure at the Ministry of Interior paints a starkly different picture—one that should raise serious concerns about his suitability for the presidency. His period in office was marked by allegations of impunity, state-sanctioned brutality, enforced disappearances, and a blatant disregard for judicial authority. These are not the hallmarks of a democratic leader; they are the warning signs of authoritarianism.

Under Matiang’i’s watch, Kenya witnessed a disturbing resurgence of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. Human rights watchdogs, civil society organizations, and concerned citizens consistently raised alarm over the unexplained abductions of individuals by security agents, only for some of these victims to reappear as corpses dumped in rivers or remote thickets. These are not isolated incidents; they represent a chilling pattern of state-sponsored terror that recalls the darkest chapters of Kenya’s history.

It is worth noting that these actions were not carried out in the shadows. Many of them occurred in broad daylight, with eyewitness accounts and video footage documenting the abductions. Yet, the Ministry of Interior under Matiang’i remained silent or dismissive. There was no accountability, no genuine investigation, and no justice for the victims and their families. In a country with a history of political violence and systemic oppression, this silence was deafening and deeply telling.

One of the foundational pillars of any democratic society is the rule of law. Leaders are expected not only to follow the law but also to uphold the independence and integrity of the judiciary. Matiang’i repeatedly failed this test.

During his time as Interior Cabinet Secretary, there were several high-profile cases where court orders were flagrantly ignored or undermined. Whether it was in the illegal deportation of opposition figures, the denial of bail to activists despite court rulings, or the continued detention of individuals contrary to legal instructions, Matiang’i’s ministry exhibited a dangerous contempt for the judiciary.

This behaviour is more than just administrative defiance—it is a signal of a leader who does not recognize limits to power. A president with such a record is likely to erode the delicate balance between branches of government, paving the way for an imperial presidency unchecked by law or reason.

Leadership reveals a person’s true character, especially when placed in positions of immense power. Matiang’i was handed one of the most powerful dockets in the government, controlling the police force, the provincial administration, and internal security. Rather than using this power to promote safety, cohesion, and justice, he presided over an administration that weaponized the state against dissenting voices.

This centralization of power, often justified under the guise of maintaining order, is a classic hallmark of authoritarian regimes. If such tendencies were evident while he was still answerable to a sitting president, what would stop him from being even more autocratic as the president himself?

Kenya’s future lies in the hands of leaders who respect institutions, protect civil liberties, and are accountable to the people. The country cannot afford to recycle leaders whose past is riddled with violations of human rights, constitutional breaches, and administrative tyranny.

Fred Matiang’i’s record is not one that inspires confidence in democratic progress. Instead, it serves as a cautionary tale of what happens when power is placed in the hands of individuals who see dissent as a threat, not a right; who see court orders as obstacles, not safeguards; and who view state power as a tool for coercion rather than service.

As citizens, we must demand better. We must not be swayed by tough talk or bureaucratic efficiency alone. Leadership is about integrity, justice, and service. In these vital areas, Fred Matiang’i has consistently fallen short.

The presidency is not a reward for loyal service or a culmination of bureaucratic success—it is a sacred trust granted by the people to one who will protect their freedoms, uphold their dignity, and respect the rule of law. Based on his past conduct, Fred Matiang’i does not meet this standard. His tenure as Interior Cabinet Secretary reveals a man more inclined toward authoritarian control than democratic governance. To entrust him with the presidency would be to risk repeating the painful mistakes of our past.

Kenya deserves better. The people deserve a leader, not a ruler.