As Kenya reels from the fallout of nationwide protests, President William Ruto has thrown his weight behind police officers facing public scrutiny, saying he will “stand for every man and woman in uniform.”

Speaking at State House on Saturday, the President offered a firm defence of security forces accused of using excessive violence during the Gen-Z-led demonstrations that rocked the country earlier this week.

“I will be there to make sure they are not threatened,” Ruto said, addressing regional and county security heads. “We must ensure that our officers who secure us, our families, our property, are also secure.”

A Week of Rage, Force, and Political Backpedalling

Ruto’s show of support came just days after Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen told police they had a right to use lethal force against rioters who stormed police stations. His message was clear: if threatened, officers could shoot.

But the backlash was swift. Rights groups and opposition leaders accused Murkomen of greenlighting extrajudicial killings. The phrase “shoot-to-kill” trended on Kenyan social media as outrage surged.

Now, the minister is walking a tightrope.

“I cannot order an Inspector General of Police on anything,” Murkomen said on Saturday, attempting to distance himself from his earlier remarks. “You will not find me anywhere saying somebody should be shot to be killed.”

Instead, he argued he was only quoting the law — specifically Section 61(2) and Schedule 6B of the National Police Service Act — which outlines circumstances under which firearms may be used, such as self-defence or the prevention of a serious crime.

Rule of Law vs. Rule by Force?

The government’s response to the protests has fuelled a broader debate: how far should state forces go in quelling unrest?

On 25 June, young protesters took to the streets in what started as a peaceful show of resistance against government taxes and alleged corruption. But the demonstrations quickly spiralled into chaos. Police stations were attacked in parts of Nairobi and other counties. Looting and arson were reported.
In the aftermath, the government cited “heinous crimes” — including robbery, rape and arson — as justification for an intensified crackdown.

Ruto has since ordered security agencies to track down perpetrators and ensure prosecution. But critics argue the heavy-handed approach risks pushing the country further into a cycle of fear and violence.

Public Fear and Political Fallout

Murkomen’s backpedal may calm some tensions, but public confidence is frayed. Civil society groups, including Amnesty International and the Kenya Human Rights Commission, have condemned the use of excessive force and demanded accountability.

“The rule of law cannot be suspended, even in a crisis,” said one rights advocate, speaking on condition of anonymity. “If the government endorses deadly force as a first resort, it sets a dangerous precedent.”

For now, the President is betting on public trust in uniformed officers. But as investigations begin into allegations of police abuse, the government faces a difficult balancing act — protecting the public without silencing dissent.

The question remains: in moments of unrest, who protects the people from those meant to protect them?