Not a Smear Campaign, Just the Truth: Fred Matiang’i’s Candidacy Should Be Feared and Rejected

In the wake of increasing public disillusionment with President William Ruto’s administration, murmurs of a possible political alternative have begun to gain traction. Among the names floating in elite boardrooms and backroom political negotiations is that of Dr. Fred Matiang’i—former Cabinet Secretary for Interior and Coordination of National Government. To some, he is a man of action; to others, a strong hand in chaotic times. But to those who value democracy, human rights, and constitutional order, Fred Matiang’i represents something far more sinister: a figure whose track record should not only disqualify him from the presidency but raise red flags about the future of the nation.

Let it be said clearly and without apology: this is not a smear campaign. It is a factual, unfiltered reminder of who Matiang’i is and what he did when he held power. It is not hate—it is history.

One of the most dangerous myths being sold to the Kenyan public is that Matiang’i’s heavy-handedness is a sign of strength, of decisive leadership. This narrative deliberately ignores the grim reality that his approach to governance was riddled with impunity, repression, and state-sponsored terror.

Under his stewardship of the interior ministry, Kenyans witnessed a frightening escalation in enforced disappearances, unexplained deaths, and the normalization of extrajudicial executions. These weren’t rumours; they were documented by civil society groups, media houses, and even international human rights organizations. Bodies would appear in forests, rivers, and alleys, victims of a security apparatus that operated without accountability. No credible investigations. No prosecutions. Just silence and fear.

A man who oversaw such atrocities should not be elevated—he should be interrogated. Choosing Matiang’i as a successor to Ruto is not progress. It is not justice. It is a pivot from one form of predation to another. It is choosing to be eaten by a lion instead of a hyena—both are predators, just dressed differently.

Secondly, leadership in a democracy demands a deep respect for institutions, especially the judiciary. Yet Matiang’i’s time in office was marred by his blatant disregard for court orders. He was involved in the illegal deportation of opposition figures, the continued detention of individuals despite court rulings, and the use of state machinery to frustrate the course of justice. Time and again, courts ordered his ministry to comply with the law, and time and again, those orders were ignored or challenged with arrogance.

This is not a man who respects the boundaries of power—this is someone who believes power is a weapon to be used, not a responsibility to be honoured. Elevating such a person to the presidency is not a solution to Kenya’s current problems. It is a prescription for constitutional collapse.

The Danger of Sanitizing His Record

There is a growing and concerning effort by some quarters to rehabilitate Matiang’i’s image—to paint him as a victim of political persecution or as a misunderstood patriot. This revisionist agenda is not only intellectually dishonest; it is dangerous. It seeks to erase the lived experiences of victims of police brutality, the families of the disappeared, and those who stood in courtrooms begging for justice that never came.

This is not about personalities. This is about precedent. If Kenya can overlook such a troubling record for the sake of “stability” or “efficiency,” then it opens the door for future tyrants to do the same, knowing that the public will eventually forget or forgive. We must resist this temptation to forget. We must not allow fear of the present to lead us blindly into a more terrifying future.

To be clear, disappointment in President Ruto’s administration is real and justified. The high cost of living, the erosion of public trust, and the sense of betrayal many feel are deeply valid. But we must not let our frustration drive us into the arms of someone whose record is just as—if not more—problematic.

Replacing Ruto with Matiang’i is not changing the system; it is changing the face of oppression. It is swapping one predator for another, one who might speak less and strike faster. The problem is not just the hyena; the problem is the belief that the lion will be any less hungry.

Kenya needs more than regime change. It needs character change. It needs a leadership ethos that is grounded in justice, in accountability, and in the protection of human dignity. Matiang’i, for all his administrative efficiency, has not demonstrated these values. He has demonstrated control, coercion, and constitutional contempt.

In a time when the public is desperate for alternatives, there is a real risk of mistaking the familiar for the trustworthy, the assertive for the wise, and the brutal for the strong. But history has shown us—time and again—that states fall not just because of bad rulers, but because good people remained silent or made choices based on fear instead of principle.

Fred Matiang’i’s record is not just a matter of political opinion. It is a matter of public record. To ignore it, to sanitize it, or to defend it under the guise of “strength” is to play Russian roulette with our democratic future.

This is not character assassination. This is character revelation. And once revealed, we must act. At the ballot, at the debate table, in civil discourse—we must reject authoritarianism in all its forms and guises. Because the next time we find ourselves crying out against injustice, we may discover that we handed power to the very hand that now silences us.