Inside Ruto's plan to use chiefs to campaign for 2027 re-election

President William Ruto’s administration is taking the gloves off in its efforts to secure his re-election, and not even the Constitution appears likely to stand in its way as the UDA administration shifts focus to compelling chiefs and their assistants to lead grassroots campaigns at public gatherings.

The Sunday Standard has established that National Government Administration Officers (NGAO), who are expected to be bipartisan and apolitical, are leading efforts to market the President’s re-election bid in villages.

The move places the administrators at the heart of the complex campaign machinery Ruto is building, which has incorporated even civil servants to promote his re-election bid, in what critics say is a disregard for the Constitution and a sign of desperation in the President’s camp.

This week, Interior Principal Secretary Raymond Omollo directed chiefs and their assistants to promote the Government’s achievements at public gatherings in a move aimed at selling the President and his projects to the electorate.

The directive has sparked debate over the political neutrality of public officers, the independence of NGAO and the possible misuse of public resources in an increasingly charged political environment.

With less than a year to the next General Election, the Kenya Kwanza administration appears to be stepping up efforts to consolidate support for Ruto amid mounting criticism over the high cost of living, abductions, insecurity, organised criminal gangs, political violence and the growing influence of the Linda Mwananchi movement.

Instead of concentrating on addressing these challenges, critics argue that sections of the administration are increasingly preoccupied with defending the Government and mobilising support for the President’s second-term bid.

The latest controversy emerged on Thursday when Omollo, during a meeting with national government administrators in Khwisero, Kakamega County, instructed chiefs, assistant chiefs and village elders to abandon routine greetings at public gatherings and actively communicate the Government’s achievements.

He told the administrators to use funerals, church services and other public meetings to explain government policies and development projects, insisting that they should not allow opposition leaders to dominate public discourse.

“Whenever you find yourself in a church, at a funeral or any other public gathering, do not just stand up when you are asked to greet people, wave your hand, introduce yourself and then sit down. You must mention at least one or two things that this government has done,” Omollo said.

He further challenged the administrators to confront what he described as misinformation and deliberate attempts by government critics to mislead Kenyans about the administration’s performance.

“We do not allow merchants of lies to mislead not just the people of Kisero but Kenyans. We must confront lies with the truth. When things have been done, they have been done openly. Do not allow anyone to intimidate you into silence,” he said.

But the directive has raised questions about whether the national government is turning an administrative structure established primarily for coordination, security and service delivery into a grassroots political mobilisation network ahead of the 2027 elections.

Political analysts and legal experts have warned that using chiefs and other public officers to promote an incumbent administration risks compromising their neutrality, undermining public confidence in government institutions and exposing administrators to hostility from residents who may not support the President.

Political analyst Dr Martin Oloo argues that the directive is part of a broader political strategy to use the extensive national government administration structure to mobilise support for Ruto.

He said the Government should not need to deploy chiefs to explain its achievements if development projects were visible and residents were already benefiting from them.

“If the government has done anything at all in those areas, it does not need to take a chief to go and tell people what the government has done. So it is not necessary to walk around telling people what the government has done if it is there,” Oloo said.

He argued that the instruction effectively turns government communication into political campaigning, particularly because administrators are being asked to defend the administration against opposition criticism.

He pointed to recent engagements between Ruto and chiefs and village elders at State House, where the President made promises concerning their welfare and facilitation, including improved working conditions and motorcycles to support their mobility.

According to Oloo, such promises, when combined with demands that administrators promote the Government’s agenda, risk creating an environment in which public officers feel compelled to demonstrate political loyalty to the appointing authority.

Oloo was categorical that public servants should not be involved in partisan political activities, arguing that the directive amounted to an abuse of office and misuse of public resources.

Political analyst Dr Muluka Baraka also warned that the directive could backfire, arguing that government administrators risk losing the trust and respect of communities if they are perceived to be acting as political agents.

Muluka said residents were capable of assessing government performance without being instructed by chiefs and village elders.

He cautioned that administrators who attempt to force government narratives on communities could provoke anger, particularly where residents are struggling with unemployment, poverty and inadequate public services.

“People tend to get offended and sometimes even angry when they are treated like fools. They have eyes; they can see. If the government has done anything, they can see. They do not need an assistant chief or the dikuru to tell them,” he said.

Muluka maintained that the Government should concentrate on delivering services rather than using administrators to defend its political interests.

“If you come and start lying to people about things they cannot see with their eyes, and you even attempt to coerce them, they will overwhelm you by their sheer numbers. Especially when you address them at funerals and other public gatherings where you are clearly outnumbered, you are endangering yourself,” he said.

Lawyer and political analyst William Onyonje said the Government must distinguish between communicating public policies and campaigning for the incumbent President.

He said NGAO officials have a legitimate responsibility to explain government programmes, promote national cohesion, coordinate security operations and educate citizens on their rights and responsibilities.

However, he argued that these responsibilities should not be confused with promoting Ruto’s political ambitions.

“Government agenda does not mean they should start campaigning for the current regime. Their agenda is about policies that facilitate service delivery, security, unity and civic education. They can persuade people to register as voters, but they should not go beyond that into campaigning,” Onyonje said.

The Constitution and public service laws provide safeguards intended to prevent public officers from using their positions to advance partisan political interests.

Article 10 of the Constitution establishes national values and principles of governance, including good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability, while Article 232 outlines the values and principles of public service.

The Public Officer Ethics Act also provides for political neutrality, prohibiting public officers from using their positions to advance political interests or engaging in activities that compromise their neutrality.

The Elections Act further restricts public officers from engaging in activities that may promote or undermine a political party or candidate.

These restrictions are particularly significant because chiefs and assistant chiefs are public officers whose responsibilities require them to serve residents regardless of their political affiliations.

Onyonje said the distinction between communicating government policies and engaging in partisan campaigning should be clear, warning that public officials who exceed their mandates risk undermining the constitutional order.

The controversy comes against the backdrop of growing concerns over the expanding visibility and influence of NGAO, particularly following the reorganisation of the national administration structure under the National Government Coordination Act.

After the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution, which introduced devolution and abolished the former provincial administration system, there were expectations that the influence of chiefs and other national government administrators would gradually be redefined.

However, the national government administration structure has remained firmly established, with chiefs, assistant chiefs and village elders maintaining a significant presence at the grassroots.

According to figures cited in the debate, the country has approximately 13,000 chiefs and assistant chiefs and about 106,000 village elders.

The extensive network gives the national government considerable reach into villages and communities, making it an influential administrative structure in matters of security, coordination and public service delivery.

However, critics fear that the same network could become an attractive political mobilisation tool for an incumbent administration seeking to consolidate support ahead of an election.

Ruto has  already hosted chiefs and village elders at State House, where he made commitments concerning their welfare and working conditions, including improved facilitation.

Although the engagements were presented as part of efforts to strengthen grassroots administration, critics questioned their timing and warned against creating the impression that administrators were being rewarded for political loyalty.

The latest directive also comes at a time when the Interior Ministry is under pressure to address security concerns, particularly allegations of abductions and forced disappearances involving government critics.

This week, Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen told the National Assembly that cases of kidnappings and abductions had dropped sharply since the Kenya Kwanza administration took office in 2022.

Murkomen defended the Government’s record, saying the administration had done more than previous governments to address abductions and that reported incidents had been investigated, including cases that eventually turned out to be self-abductions.

He cited the establishment of a dedicated investigations unit as part of the Government’s efforts to deal with the incidents.

However, his assurances have been questioned following the disappearance of Nairobi-based lawyer Abshir Ahmedsadak Abdi, who was allegedly bundled into a vehicle by armed men on November 1.

On Wednesday, security agencies failed to produce the lawyer before the High Court, with an Anti-Terrorism Police Unit officer telling the court that Abdi was not in their custody.

His whereabouts remained unknown, raising fresh concerns over the Government’s commitment to addressing forced disappearances.

The concerns have also been amplified by the September 1 abduction of The Standard Associate Editor Alex Kiprotich, who was seized by four armed, masked men while driving towards Nakuru City.

Kiprotich was found safely on September 2 after spending about nine hours in the hands of his abductors. However, those responsible have yet to be brought to book.

Meanwhile, political violence has continued to raise questions about the security environment ahead of the elections.

On Thursday, Wiper Patriotic Front and Ukombozi Alliance Party leader Kalonzo Musyoka and other opposition leaders were caught up in violence  following clashes involving suspected goons and police officers during political engagements in Migori County.

Kalonzo condemned the attacks, describing them as acts of political intolerance and an infringement of the constitutional rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and political participation.

Critics argue that the Government should be directing its energies towards addressing these challenges instead of involving public administrators in political mobilisation.

Police officers and NGAO officials have also faced criticism over their response to the illicit brew menace, which continues to claim lives in different parts of the country.

The criticism raises questions about priorities within the Interior Ministry, whose mandate includes maintaining law and order, coordinating security agencies and protecting citizens.

For analysts, the central concern is not whether government officials should communicate development achievements, but whether they can do so without compromising their constitutional and statutory responsibilities.