With strong signs that Fred Matiang’i may enter the 2027 Kenyan presidential race, his legacy as Interior Cabinet Secretary should return to the national conversation. Known for his firm grip on state security and controversial crackdowns on political dissent, Matiang’i's tenure was marked by high-profile clashes with the opposition and a governance style seen by many as authoritarian.
Now, under the Kenya Kwanza administration, Kipchumba Murkomen—the current Cabinet Secretary for the Ministry of Interior and National Administration—is showing strikingly similar traits. Though the faces have changed, the Ministry’s hardline posture against dissent remains intact.
Matiang’i’s Legacy: The Strongman of State Power
Fred Matiang’i was arguably one of the most powerful Interior Ministers in Kenya’s recent history. During the tense 2017 election period and its aftermath, he led sweeping crackdowns on opposition protests, justified as efforts to maintain law and order. But those crackdowns often spiraled into violence, with police accused of using excessive force, resulting in deaths, injuries, and mass arrests. Matiang’i stood defiant, rarely backing down or acknowledging responsibility, and was frequently seen as using his office to shield the state from accountability rather than protect the public.His tenure was also marred by suppression of dissent—media houses were shut down, court orders ignored, and critics of the government harassed or deported. The deportation of lawyer Miguna Miguna and the media blackout during Raila Odinga’s symbolic “swearing-in” remain some of the most chilling examples of state overreach under his leadership.
Murkomen Steps In: A Change of Guard, Not of Philosophy
Now at the helm of the powerful Interior Ministry, Kipchumba Murkomen brings his own brand of assertiveness. Initially known for his political savvy and vocal defence of President Ruto, Murkomen has embraced the security docket with the same no-nonsense attitude that defined Matiang’i. His recent hard stance on civil unrest, particularly in response to the Gen Z-led protests against the Finance Bill, has drawn sharp criticism from human rights organizations and civil society.
Instead of opening dialogue with the largely peaceful and youth-driven demonstrations, Murkomen has labelled many of the protest organizers as “agents of foreign influence” and “threats to national stability.” Activists have reported increased surveillance, arrests, and intimidation—tactics disturbingly reminiscent of Matiang’i’s era.
Hard-line Responses to Gen Z: A Worrying Pattern
What makes Murkomen’s approach even more alarming is the generational shift in the protests. The Gen Z movement has largely been organic, decentralized, and driven by digital activism—yet it has been met with the same playbook of state repression. Rather than engaging the concerns of a disillusioned youth population facing economic hardship and corruption, Murkomen has responded with riot police, tear gas, and blanket warnings.His defense of the police force, even in the face of documented abuses, signals a continuity of impunity. Critics argue that Murkomen is rapidly turning the Interior Ministry into a tool for political shielding rather than public service—much like his predecessor.
Authoritarian Echoes: Then and Now
Matiang’i and Murkomen share more than a Cabinet position. Both have displayed a governing style that is top-down, intolerant of criticism, and fiercely loyal to the executive. Their rhetoric paints critics as enemies of progress, rather than stakeholders in a democratic process. While Matiang’i justified repression in the name of national security during political unrest, Murkomen is doing so under the guise of protecting national identity and sovereignty from “external influence.”This framing conveniently sidesteps the core demands of protesters—transparency, accountability, and economic justice—and instead doubles down on state control.
Conclusion: Two Faces of the Same Problem
As Fred Matiang’i eyes 2027, Kenyans must weigh not only what he did in office but also what his leadership style represented. At the same time, under Kipchumba Murkomen’s stewardship, the Interior Ministry risks deepening its legacy of silencing dissent and criminalizing civic action.The comparison is clear and urgent: different faces, same strong-arm politics. If leaders continue to treat protest and activism as threats rather than democratic expressions, they will only widen the gap between the government and the people. Kenya deserves leadership that listens, not just commands; that protects, not just controls. Whether under Matiang’i or Murkomen, the Interior Ministry must be held to this higher standard.
Add comment
Comments