On February 23, 2026, Mr. William Ruto’s regime carried out an illegal and unjustified rendition of Brian Kagoro, the Africa Director of the Open Society Foundations (OSF), barring him from entering Kenya, and taking him to South Africa.

Immigration officials intercepted him on February 22 when he arrived at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. Shortly, officers from the National Intelligence Service (NIS) detained and subjected him to an intensive interrogation that lasted 14 hours. Later, Kagoro was verbally declared persona non grata and removed from Kenya’s territory without due process, after authorities falsely and maliciously accused him of funding the Gen Z–led protests in Kenya, allegations that remain unsupported and politically motivated.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) condemns this action as an act of aggression and a direct assault on the work of human rights defenders across the region. The incident points to a deepening trend of transnational repression, which led CIVICUS Monitor to classify Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda as repressed in its 2024 and 2026 reports, an assessment that signals severe democratic backsliding and a rapidly shrinking civic space.

Kagoro is a longtime and widely respected Pan-Africanist and democracy advocate who has, for decades, contributed to advancing democratic freedoms and accountability for human rights abuses across Africa. He has engaged in Kenya in various capacities over many years, making his sudden targeting alarming and unjustifiable.

This arbitrary action constitutes a gross violation of Kagoro’s constitutional rights, including the right to human dignity, freedom and security of the person, freedom of expression, protection from arbitrary detention, and the right to fair administrative action. Article 47 of the Constitution of Kenya guarantees that every person is entitled to administrative action that is lawful, reasonable, procedurally fair, and accompanied by written reasons where rights are adversely affected. These guarantees were blatantly ignored in Kagoro’s case, after he was also held for a long time, denied legal representation, and a family contact.

The assault on Kagoro follows a troubling ordeal involving KHRC’s Martin Mavenjina, who was illegally and extraordinarily renditioned to Uganda on July 5, 2025. To date, the Ruto regime has refused to allow his return to Kenya, and this reinforces concerns about an entrenched policy of targeting human rights defenders.

As the country approaches the 2027 general election, KHRC notes that the government appears intent on deflecting political responsibility for the widespread protests that erupted organically in 2024 and 2025 by attributing them to foreign influence. This narrative ignores the domestic grievances that drove thousands of young Kenyans into the streets; anger fueled by punitive political and economic policies and the steady erosion of democratic accountability.

Indeed, the regime’s own actions betray this deflection. The gazettement of a panel of experts on compensation for victims of demonstrations and public protests—since declared unconstitutional for usurping the mandate of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR)—amounts to an implied admission of state responsibility, even as officials publicly deny it. This contradiction underscores a broader attempt at cover-up and whitewashing.

KHRC therefore demands the immediate reversal of the decision against Kagoro to allow him unfettered entry into and work in Kenya, in line with his regional leadership mandate. The same demand applies to Mavenjina. KHRC further demands that NIS and Kenya’s Immigration Department issue a written explanation for the denial of entry and rendition, offer a public apology, and guarantee non-repetition. KHRC also urges the KNCHR and the Commission on Administrative Justice to initiate independent investigations into the growing trend of renditions targeting human rights defenders and to recommend effective remedies. Finally, KHRC demands that the Ruto regime uphold human rights and the rule of law in all its actions.

The Board and Secretariat of the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) are deeply saddened by the demise of comrade Mugambi Kiai on February 23, 2026. We extend our sincere condolences to his family, friends, and the wider human rights movement.

Mugambi shared a long and deep relationship with KHRC, having volunteered as one of its first staff members in the early 1990s. He joined KHRC at a time of severe political repression under KANU and the dictatorship of Daniel arap Moi, when the risks were high.

Mugambi was an exceptionally brilliant and fearless constitutional lawyer and governance expert. Throughout his life, he was a strong voice for human rights and democracy in Kenya and beyond.

At the time of his death, Mugambi was serving as Regional Director at ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa. He previously worked as a Senior Advisor at Open Society Initiative for East Africa (OSIEA), where he supported civic action and democratic reform across the region.

Mugambi remained a trusted supporter, advisor, and source of inspiration to KHRC and the broader human rights community. He was the chief strategist for the Angaza Movement, a governance-sector initiative that promoted rights-based, transformative engagement before and after the 2022 general elections.

He was also the lead convenor of “Simba 8”, a forum of eight revolutionary human rights defenders. Just three weeks before his demise, despite his health, Mugambi hosted an online conversation on the state of the nation, which demonstrated his resilience and enduring commitment to the struggle.

Mugambi’s legacy will live on in the movements he strengthened, the ideas he shaped, and the courage he inspired. Comrade, rest in power!

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) strongly condemns the violent disruption of a prayer service at Witima ACK Church in Othaya, Nyeri, on January 25, 2026.

Video footage and eyewitness accounts show police officers firing tear gas and live ammunition, placing the lives of worshippers, including children, in grave danger.

These actions directly violate a High Court order issued in June 2025 following a petition by KHRC. The order expressly prohibits law enforcement officers from firing live ammunition, deploying tear gas, or attacking hospitals, ambulances, emergency medical centres, and places of worship.

The same ruling, delivered by Justice Bahati Mwamuye, further bars the use of tear gas, chemical agents, water cannons, or any crowd-control measures against unarmed persons seeking refuge in vehicles, enclosed or semi-enclosed spaces, poorly ventilated areas, or with limited means of safe and orderly exit.

Places of worship are protected spaces under the law and must never be targets of police violence. The events at Witima ACK Church must be independently and thoroughly investigated, and all those responsible, clearly identified in available footage, must be held accountable.

KHRC further calls for accountability under the principle of command responsibility for officers who knew, or should have known, of these violations and failed to prevent them, as a necessary step to halt the escalating pattern of police violence.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) expresses profound concern over the regime's proposal to establish a digital intelligence unit to monitor online activity, as contained in the annual report on the state of national security (2024–2025), tabled in Parliament by  Mr. William Ruto.

National security, which encompasses protection against internal and external threats to Kenya’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, as well as the rights, freedoms, property, and other national interests of its people, is promoted and guaranteed in accordance with the Constitution, as outlined in Article 238. Critical to this is sub-article (2)(b) of 238, which declares that national security shall be pursued in compliance with utmost respect for the rule of law, democracy, human rights, and fundamental freedoms.

Consequently, the proposed digital intelligence unit, as presently conceived, raises grave governance and justice concerns about the standardization of mass digital surveillance and the erosion of fundamental rights, particularly at a politically sensitive moment as the country approaches the 2027 general elections.

This nefarious proposal comes in the midst of the deepening political and digital repression in the country and the region. The latest report by CIVICUS, which KHRC and the Civic Freedoms Forum (CFF) supported, presents an unfortunate situation of repressed civic space. Many punitive and prohibitive policies have been implemented since 2013 (when Ruto became the deputy president under Uhuru Kenyatta), including the Security Amendment Bills of 2014, the National Integrated Management System (NIIMS), popularly known as Huduma Namba, and the planned Device Management System (DMS) for mobile networks, among others.

The latest was the enactment of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, which significantly expanded the regime's powers to block online content and compel compliance by internet service providers. KHRC, alongside other petitioners, has successfully challenged these before the courts for violating the Constitution, including Articles 31 (right to privacy), 33 (freedom of expression), 36 (right to association), and 37 (right to assembly).

The regime's abuse of digital surveillance and policing was at its worst during the 2024 Gen Z-led protests, which saw many young people tracked, captured, and subjected to unprecedented atrocities. According to the regime’s own report, 42 civilians were killed, hundreds were injured, and over 1,700 people were arrested -- although these figures have been deliberately and vastly underreported to downplay the magnitude of the violations. This has also deepened transnational repression.

Thus, the regime’s framing of social media as a driver of “lawlessness” and a tool for protest mobilization risks criminalizing dissent and peaceful civic engagement. These fundamental rights and freedoms are expressly safeguarded under the Constitution and the international treaties, and the regime has no power to rescind them whatsoever.

Key legal and human rights concerns

1. Right to privacy

The proposed Digital Intelligence Unit lacks clarity on the nature, scope, and limits of data collection. Any system that enables the monitoring of online communications without prior judicial authorization, necessity, proportionality, and independent oversight constitutes unconstitutional surveillance. We cannot afford to have unfettered access to our data.

2. Freedom of expression and assembly

Digital spaces have become central to democratic participation, political organizing, journalism, and human rights advocacy. Treating online mobilization as a security threat undermines the rights the Constitution was designed to protect. In a context where journalists, activists, and human rights defenders have increasingly faced harassment, arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial violence, expanded digital surveillance powers create a heightened risk of profiling, intimidation, and political targeting.

3. The State has not disclosed which agencies will operate the digital intelligence unit, what technologies will be deployed, or what independent mechanisms will be in place to prevent abuse.

Based on the above, KHRC firmly rejects the establishment of this unit, and we commit to challenging it in all policy and civic spaces. Comparative experience shows that while some democratic states address cybercrime through narrowly tailored and legally constrained mechanisms, unchecked digital surveillance is characteristic of authoritarian regimes and hybrid democracies where technology is used to suppress dissent and entrench political power. Kenya must not follow this path.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) registers its deep concern and outrage at the violence, loss of life, and arbitrary arrests that occurred during the public participation session on the Environmental and Social  Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report for the proposed Ikolomani Gold Mine by Shanta Gold on 4th December 2025. What should have been a lawful, peaceful, and inclusive civic process degenerated into intimidation, chaos, and impunity targeting citizens whose only intention was to demand respect for their rights and freedoms.

This incident is part of a disturbing and escalating pattern in Kenya’s extractive sector, where communities seeking accountability are met with brutal force, political threats, and procedural manipulation. Mining zones are increasingly becoming death traps rather than engines of community development. We continue seeing State and corporate repression been normalized in curtailing civic freedoms when expressing dissent against punitive and anti-people decisions. This must stop. In this regard, we wish to submit the following concerns and recommendations: -

1. Abrogation of Peoples Power in Natural Resources Governance

The regime in office together with its corporate accomplices have adopted an unconstitutional and oppressive notion that minerals belong to the government for exploitation at whims. This is the warped and misconceived understanding that is creating the effrontery that people have no say in the exploration and exploitation of minerals.

We wish to take this opportunity to affirm that the sovereignty of the people as proclaimed in Article 1 of the constitution applies in all spheres of governance including natural resource sector. This means that the people retain the ultimate authority and the right to self-determination in all processes involving public resources and interests.

This is further affirmed by the provisions of Chapter 5 on Land and Environment in the constitution (where land is defined to comprehensively include natural resources[1]) in Article 61(1) that: “All land belongs to the people of Kenya collectively as a nation, as communities and individuals”. Notably, the government is not listed as an owner but functions only as a trustee and administrator on behalf of the people.

It is therefore time for the regime to understand that it has no monopoly over decisions concerning the management of extractives and other land-based resources. Such decisions cannot lawfully or morally proceed without Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) from the people, who remain the ultimate owners and rights-holders.

2. State Repression undermining public participation in Resource Governance

Active and meaningful civic engagements and accrual of benefits thereof is one of the best mechanisms of realizing the aforementioned sovereignty in resources governance.  To this end, we want to remind the government and Shanta Gold that public participation is a constitutional right under Articles 10[2], 35[3], 42[4], 69[5], and 70[6] of the Constitution of Kenya. It is also a core element of environmental democracy under Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA)[7] and the Environmental Impact Assessmentm(EIA)[8] Regulations.

The violent disruption of a lawful public forum, the reported deaths, and the arbitrary arrests of residents represent a gross and unacceptable violation of the rights to life, human dignity, peaceful assembly, expression, and access to information. This is inimical to our constitutional, policy and international human rights obligations.

KHRC condemns, in the strongest possible terms these injustices geared towards silencing legal and legitimate community concerns. Requisite state and civic institutions must urgently come in to ensure the protection of the land, resources and environmental justice defenders in this space.

We also call upon the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) to exercise its constitutional obligations under Article 59(1)(e)[9] to independently investigate these and ensure that the perpetrators held to account. The Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) should also step in.

3. NEMA’s Failure to Safeguard Environmental and Community Rights

KHRC notes with grave concern that the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) has become increasingly unresponsive to public objections and community memoranda on extractive projects across the country. Despite serious concerns tabled by residents of Ikolomani including concerns over livelihood risks, displacement, and environmental impacts NEMA failed to ensure a secure, dignified, and transparent public participation process. This failure raises a fundamental question of Whose interests does NEMA serve?

Its recent conduct signals a worrying departure from its statutory and constitutional mandate as an independent environmental regulator. Undoubtedly, and as evidenced across several mining regions, NEMA has become the weakest link in environmental governance and the biggest institutional betrayal of communities living in mining zones.

In Kambe Ribe, Kilifi County, for example, the persistent cries of community members regarding the abuse of ESIA processes and the severe pollution of air, water, and the surrounding environment by Simba Cement have repeatedly fallen on deaf ears. Despite numerous attempts by residents to seek NEMA’s intervention, the agency has remained silent and inactive, allowing impunity to thrive at the expense of public health, environmental integrity, and constitutional rights.

KHRC demands that NEMA: -

• Immediately suspend the ESIA approval process for the Ikolomani Gold Mine.
• Facilitate a fresh, inclusive, and independently monitored public participation forum.
• Publicly explain its failure to address the submissions and objections raised by residents.

Further, KHRC calls upon the Joint Parliamentary Committee on lands, natural resources, minerals, forests, and environment to exercise its oversight mandate over NEMA and ensure that the agency faithfully implements its constitutional and statutory obligations in this matter.

4. Artisanal Miners’ Livelihoods Are Under Threat

One of the central issues at stake is the fear among Artisanal and Small-scale Miners (ASM) that the entry of Shanta Gold will erase their livelihoods and criminalise their long-standing economic activities.

ASM supports thousands of families in Kakamega and surrounding regions. Yet they have been excluded from critical consultations, and no transition or inclusion plan has been presented. This disregard violates their rights, disrupts local economies, and undermines national development frameworks that promote formalisation and support of ASM.

As per the Mining Act of 2016[10], ASMs are  not illegal actors, they are rights-holders whose livelihoods must be protected, respected, and integrated into Kenya’s mineral development agenda.A study on the status of the Artisanal and Small Scale Miners is critical. Such would deepen public understanding of their needs and impact.

5. Communities Fear Forced Evictions and Relocation

Residents around the proposed mining areas fear arbitrary displacement, loss of ancestral land, and disruption of cultural and social systems yet no clear, rights-based resettlement or compensation framework has been communicated.

This is a gross affront to the Constitution of Kenya, the National Land Policy, the Land Act, the National Land Commission Act, and international human rights standards including the UN Guidelines on Forced Evictions, the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), and the Right to Remedy

It is high time Kenya upheld these and adopted a comprehensive national policy on resettlement and compensation, anchored in human rights, FPIC, and constitutional guarantees, to prevent such recurring violations.

No project should proceed where communities are threatened with eviction or forced to accept projects under coercive or opaque circumstances.

We also call upon the KNCHR, Office of the Attorney General and Parliament to ensure the enforcement of these.

6. A National Pattern of Violations: Ramula (Siaya) and Mwibona (Vihiga)

The crisis unfolding in Ikolomani mirrors the same human rights violations reported in Ramula, Siaya County, and Mwibona, Vihiga County where Shanta Gold is associated with similar irregularities, lack of transparency, and procedural breaches. In both areas: -

1. Residents report the deployment of security agents to antagonise, intimidate, and harass community members.
2. Public participation did not occur or was deeply flawed.
3. NEMA proceeded to approve the ESIA despite these failures.
4. The State Department of Mining now appears poised to issue licences to Shanta Gold, relying on ESIA approvals by NEMA that are deeply questionable and arguably unconstitutional. This move disregards the more than 300+ objections submitted by residents of Ramula, none of which received any response and comes amid serious concerns that no feasibility study was conducted in Mwibona and that public participation in the ESIA processes was either fundamentally defective or entirely absent.

This raises serious questions about the integrity of Kenya’s ESIA and licensing processes and the increasing misuse of state security to silence community voices. KHRC reminds all state agencies that no mining licence overrides community rights. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is not optional but rather it is a binding legal and ethical requirement.

We therefore call upon the Government of Kenya to: -

1. Immediately halt all licensing processes involving Shanta Gold in Ikolomani, Ramula, and Mwibona.
2. Return to the communities for genuine, inclusive, and independently supervised public engagement.
3. Ensure full compliance with FPIC, EMCA, the Mining Act (2016), the Constitution of Kenya, and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Again we urge KNCHR and parliament to monitor and oversight these.

7. Corporates violating their national and transnational human rights obligations

The situation described above is a direct consequence of deepening corporate capture where private companies, through their proximity and influence within State structures, are allowed to operate with impunity and outside the bounds of accountability. This pattern is not isolated to Ikolomani, Ramula, or Mwibona; it mirrors what communities in Kambe Ribe, Kilifi County, continue to experience, where Simba Cement has operated with similar disregard for the law, community rights, and environmental safeguards.

We therefore demand that, as the project proponent, Shanta Gold must fully comply with the Constitution of Kenya, all applicable national policies and laws, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, relevant regional and international treaties, the African Mining Vision, and Kenya’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights

Failure to conduct proper human rights due diligence and failure to prevent harm is unacceptable, irresponsible, and unlawful and should be exposed and challenged accordingly.

8. KHRC’s Commitment

KHRC stands firmly with the people of Ikolomani, Ramula, Mwibona, and all communities where mining activities are resisted due to abusive and exploitative extractive practices.We will continue to:-

• document and expose the violations,
• pursue accountability within the national and transnational policy chains,
• support community training, organising, actions and protection
• provide legal and advocacy support, and
• push for a rights-respecting extractive sector grounded in justice and human dignity.

As an organization committed to the protection of human rights and the rule of law, we reiterate that no Kenyan should be violated for participating in a public forum, no miner should lose their livelihood without due process, and no community should be intimidated for demanding transparency and justice.If Kenya’s extractive sector is to contribute meaningfully to national development, it cannot be built on fear, coercion, or the suppression of rights. It must be grounded in accountability, community consent, and the highest standards of human rights. This can only be realised when we respect and uphold our national and international obligations on governance, environmental protection, and human rights.

A genuine appreciation of the inviolable rights and sovereign power of the people especially in decisions affecting land and natural resources is indispensable. It is imperative for the State to remember at the onset, that it is not the owner of these resources. It is merely a trustee, mandated to act in the best interests of the people and the nation. KHRC will continue to stand guard to ensure that the Constitution is upheld to the letter and that the rights of communities are never sacrificed in the name of development.

[1] Under Article 260  on Interpretation:  Land includes among others: “natural resources completely contained on or under the earth surface”. Natural resources are also defined to include mineral, forests etc

[2] Constitution of Kenya, Article 10 ;National values and principles of governance, including participation of the people, transparency, and accountability

[3] Constitution of Kenya, Article 35 ;Right of access to information held by the State and by another person required for the exercise or protection of a right

[4] Constitution of Kenya, Article 42 ;Right to a clean and healthy environment, including the right to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations.

[5] Constitution of Kenya, Article 69 ;Obligations of the State regarding sustainable exploitation, utilisation, management, and conservation of the environment and natural resources, including public participation in related decision-making processes.

[6] Constitution of Kenya, Article 70 ;Enforcement of environmental rights, including the right to seek court redress where these rights or obligations are violated.

[7] Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA), No. 8 of 1999 (Revised Edition 2015), Sections 3, 58–60 which establish environmental rights, require EIAs for projects, and mandate public participation in environmental decision-making.

[8] Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations, 2003 ;Regulations 7, 9, 16, 21, and 22, which outline the requirement for public participation, disclosure, stakeholder consultations, and community engagement during the EIA process.

[9] Constitution of Kenya, Article 59(1)(e) — Mandates the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights to investigate complaints of human rights violations and to take steps to secure appropriate redress where human rights have been violated.

[10] Mining Act, No. 12 of 2016 — Sections 2 and 4 define artisanal mining as a lawful category of mineral operations; Sections 95–99 establish the Artisanal Mining Permit and outline rights, obligations, and protections for ASM; Section 193 requires the State to promote equitable, transparent and sustainable development of mineral resources, including livelihood considerations.

KHRC welcomes the December 4, 2025, decision by the Kerugoya High Court, which has invalidated William Ruto’s unlawful appointment of a panel to compensate victims of police excesses during protests.

The court affirmed our long-standing position published on August 21, 2025, that the mandate to document, investigate, and facilitate redress for victims of state violence squarely lies with the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR), as provided for in Article 59(1) of the Constitution and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights Act (2011). 

KNCHR is mandated to, among others, “receive and investigate complaints about alleged abuses of human rights and take steps to secure appropriate redress where human rights have been violated”.

The unprecedented decision goes further to uphold constitutionalism and respect for human rights and tame the endless culture of executive overreach and impunity that has been undermining the operations of constitutional commissions and independent offices.

The ruling also reminds us that while we advance the best transitional justice mechanisms for the victims and our people, we must remain patient and sober lest we become hopeless and accept anything that comes from the violators.

This determination should also serve as a governance lesson to the regime in power, demonstrating that presidential authoritarianism, as perfected by the post-independence and pre-2010 constitution regimes, has no place in our political democracy and dispensation.

As indicated in our earlier statement, this profoundly unlawful panel reporting to the presidency and composed of deep state operatives responsible for the atrocities in question was a political tactic to derail justice and hoodwink victims and society at large.

The result was going to be either a whitewash or a cover-up. There is no way for an alleged perpetrator to set up a mechanism to investigate their own culpability. It is the reason other truth-telling and justice-seeking initiatives led by the former executives have failed.

For this reason, Kenyans, as well as the rest of the world, must learn from the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Process, which was led by the African Commission and the UN following the 2007-08 post-election violence. Two independent commissions, led by judges Phillip Waki and Johannes Kriegler, were established to investigate the post-election violence and electoral irregularities, respectively. Both commissions reported to the relevant international institutions for accountability. That is how we were able to get critical findings and actions regarding the injustices at hand.

Additionally, as a result of this process, Kenya’s constitution established constitutional commissions and independent offices, granting them the requisite mandates and independence to investigate abuses within their respective spheres of responsibility. The KNCHR is one of the four constitutional commissions, as per Article 252(3), with special powers to issue summons to witnesses during investigations.

It is unfortunate that the KNCHR almost compromised on this fight and opportunity when its new chair, Claris Ogangah, accepted the position of vice chairperson of the very unlawful panel. Disappointingly, her decision to take an appointment to an illegal outfit came as Kenyans were fighting within and outside courts for the KNCHR to lead this process, based on the facts stated above. Consequently, since the KNCHR nearly ceded its independence, any process it undertakes must be conducted in consultation with human rights defenders, human rights organizations, survivors, and victim groups.

As such, this raises political questions as to why a chair of an independent commission should accept instructions from the executive it is mandated to investigate. The fact that this is an illegal and compromised process makes it more reprehensible and despicable. Was the newly appointed chair of the KNCHR simply gullible or outrightly not fit-for-purpose?

We challenge the KNCHR to fully exercise this mandate to ensure truth, justice, and reparations for the injustices committed by the state against the people of Kenya.  The KNCHR must remain intensely vigilant of the executive's attempts to undermine its work. We commit to fully support and protect its mandate and independence. 

Finally, and pursuant to Article 249(3), Parliament should allocate adequate resources to enable the KNCHR to execute this integral assignment, in line with the court order and its constitutional obligations to uphold human rights and deliver justice. This support should also extend to other constitutional commissions and independent offices. The executive should stop interfering with these institutions henceforth.

Editor's note: Read "Who Owns Kenya" here, and "The Economics of Repression" here.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission has released two new reports showing how Kenya’s current economic direction is stripping resources from essential services, worsening inequality, and allowing historical injustices, especially those tied to land, to fester.

Economics of repression

The first report, “The Economics of Repression,” reveals that Kenya’s public finances are now structured in ways that harm ordinary people.

Today, 68 percent of all ordinary revenue goes into paying public debt and government salaries, leaving less than a third of the budget for health, education, food security, water, sanitation, housing, and social protection.

The report traces how this crisis has grown. In just four years, interest on public debt has jumped to 25 percent from 18 percent of total spending, draining money from essential services.

Programmes meant to protect vulnerable citizens are shrinking when they are needed most, according to the report. For example, support for older persons has decreased to Sh15 billion from Sh18 billion, funding for orphans has reduced to Sh5 billion from Sh7 billion, and resources for persons with severe disabilities continue to decline in real terms.

The health sector is also suffering. In Nairobi alone, real health spending has dropped to Sh7 billion from Sh8 billion, despite a population of over 5.7 million residents.

Meanwhile, the county’s pending bills have exploded, now 300 times higher than the county’s total expenditure, and the wage bill consumes nearly half the entire budget, leaving very little for services that citizens depend on.

According to the report, these financial choices have painful consequences.

Families told KHRC about hospitals without medicine, patients being turned away for lack of insurance, and school learning disrupted because the national government delays sending capitation funds.

Youth reported job losses as businesses struggle under relentless taxation. Persons with disabilities wait years for support, while single mothers and families in informal settlements say they have been completely abandoned.

Who owns Kenya?

The second report, “Who Owns Kenya?”, shows that Kenya’s economic crisis is also rooted in land inequality.

Land remains the country’s most valuable resource, but its ownership is extremely unequal, as fewer than two percent of Kenyans own more than half of the country’s arable land, much of it held idle or acquired irregularly.

Meanwhile, 98 percent of all farm holdings, mostly small and averaging just 1.2 hectares, occupy only 46 percent of farmed land, while 0.1 percent of large-scale landholders occupy 39 percent.

This skewed ownership denies millions of Kenyans access to livelihoods, the report says, as it limits agricultural productivity, fuels food insecurity, and locks out young people and women from opportunities to build wealth.

It is also tied to Kenya’s ongoing hunger crisis, where 2.2 million people are currently facing acute food insecurity, as Kenya scores 25 on the Global Hunger Index, placing it in the “serious” category.

The report shows that community land remains especially vulnerable to exploitation. Delays in registration, forged titles, boundary manipulation, and politically engineered evictions continue to displace communities.

In the Coast region, for example, more than 65 percent of residents in counties such as Kilifi, Kwale, and Lamu lack formal land titles, leaving generations trapped as squatters on ancestral land. These counties consistently score below the national average in health, education, and income.

However, despite land’s enormous economic value, land-based taxes contribute less than one percent of total county revenue across most counties. Large landowners continue to benefit from weak taxation, outdated valuation rolls, political interference, and deliberate under-assessment of property values.

Some high-value areas, such as Karen and Muthaiga in Nairobi, and Diani, Mtwapa, and Watamu in the Coast region, have been undervalued for decades, allowing the wealthy to pay far less than they should.

The report finds that Kenya operates two economic systems: one for the wealthy, who enjoy access to land, political protection, and minimal taxation, and another for ordinary citizens, who pay high taxes on basic goods and income while receiving fewer public services.

Despite this, the report states that land remains at the heart of the solution. Introducing a strong and progressive land value tax could transform Kenya’s revenue system.

Taxing idle and speculative land could reduce land hoarding, bring down prices, promote productive land use, and unlock resources for counties.

A well-implemented land tax system could raise significant revenue. Estimates suggest that wealth taxation in Kenya could generate up to Sh125 billion, nearly double the current budget for social protection.

KHRC is calling on the William Ruto regime to rethink how the country raises and spends its resources.

“Kenya needs economic decisions that put people first, protect rights, and ensure fair distribution of national resources,” KHRC executive director Davis Malombe said during the launch. “This includes reducing waste and corruption, managing debt responsibly, strengthening transparency, reforming land taxation, and supporting communities who have been ignored or displaced.”

Chairperson, Commissioners, distinguished delegates,

We address this Commission at a moment of a disturbing constitutional and human rights crisis in Kenya. Three years into President William Ruto's regime, the country is witnessing systematic state violence, institutional capture, and contempt for the rule of law. The President's state-of-the-nation addresses have erased the blood and pain of victims of state repression.

The regime has dismantled democratic guardrails. Parliament has been reduced to a rubber stamp, the Judiciary battered through contempt and defiance, and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions weaponized to persecute dissenters while shielding allies. Court orders are routinely ignored, unconstitutional bodies created, and repressive legislation rammed through a captured legislature. This has enabled attempts to extend presidential term limits and restrict fundamental freedoms.

The human toll is staggering. Between 2023 and 2025, state security forces killed more than 246 people. In July 2023 alone, 51 protesters were killed in five days during demonstrations against punitive taxation. Enforced disappearances, abductions, torture, and arbitrary arrests have become normalized. More than 1,700 protesters, including minors, have been unlawfully arrested, and 75 face trumped-up terrorism charges. Oversight bodies, including the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, the Independent Policing Oversight Authority, the Office of the Controller of Budget, and the Office of the Auditor-General, have been systematically weakened.

We are deeply concerned by credible reports implicating Safaricom PLC, Kenya's largest telecommunications provider, and Vodafone Group PLC, in alleged systematic breaches of customers' data privacy and complicity in grave human rights violations. Investigations have revealed that Safaricom allegedly grants security agencies unfettered access to sensitive customer data, enabling state surveillance and facilitating enforced disappearances, renditions, and extrajudicial killings in Kenya. Such actions have life-and-death consequences. 

Civic space is also closing fast. CIVICUS Monitor now ranks Kenya as "repressed." Journalists, human rights defenders, and content creators face arbitrary arrests, abductions, and killings. Some of the most recent alarming cases include those of Martin Mavenjina, Bob Njagi, and Nicholas Oyoo. Mavenjina, a staff member of KHRC, was illegally and extraordinarily renditioned to Uganda in June this year for his role in holding the Kenyan regime accountable for egregious human rights violations. To date, Mavenjina remains trapped in Uganda. Still, this year, Ugandan state agents abducted Njagi and Oyoo for standing in solidarity with Bobi Wine. Their whereabouts remain unknown.

This authoritarian drift is compounded by deep corruption and economic mismanagement. Billions have been lost through procurement scandals in health, agriculture, housing, and infrastructure, while ordinary Kenyans face worsening poverty, mass evictions, and crumbling essential services.

Several multinational corporations have been implicated in serious human rights violations, including assault, killings, and rape, despite Kenya being the first country to adopt a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. Across Kenya, communities are also being denied their fair share of natural resource revenues, with royalties owed under the Mining Act of 2016 still unpaid eight years after its enactment. Free, prior, and informed consent, as well as community development agreements, are intended to ensure meaningful consultation, participation, and equitable benefit-sharing; however, they remain largely unimplemented.

Kenya also continues to fall short of its constitutional and international obligations to protect women and minority groups, particularly gender and sexual minorities. LGBTQI+ persons remain exposed to hate, discrimination, and violence with little state protection. LGBTQI+ organizations have been unlawfully raided or denied registration, and transgender persons continue to be denied legal gender recognition despite judicial guidance.

As these violations are happening, the Kenyan regime continues to show an unwillingness to cooperate with international and regional human rights mechanisms. It has failed to extend standing invitations to Special Rapporteurs and has ignored or delayed responses to multiple requests for country visits by mandate holders covering critical areas. 

We urge this Commission to hold the Kenyan state and its corporate enablers accountable and to press for strong safeguards to ensure that power and technology are not weaponized against citizens.  Specifically, we make the following recommendations:

1. The regime must respect and uphold the Kenyan Constitution, court orders, and all international treaties and agreements to which Kenya is a party. It must also take concrete measures to protect women and LGBTQI+ persons and end all structural discrimination.
2. The Kenyan parliament must reclaim its independence and halt retrogressive laws, and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution must end political persecution and restore prosecutorial integrity.
3. The regime must ensure that oversight institutions in Kenya are insulated from political interference and adequately funded to ensure their effectiveness.
4. The regime must immediately cease assault on civic space, including arrests, disappearances, and censorship, and ensure that perpetrators of state violence are held accountable, regardless of rank.
5. Safaricom and Vodafone must face accountability for complicity in rights violations.
6. The regime must ensure the full implementation of the Mining Act of 2016, including the timely distribution of royalties.
7. The regime must extend standing invitations to Special Rapporteurs and working groups and fully cooperate with their requests for country visits.

Editor's note: Read the petition here.

Reuben Kigame and the Kenya Human Rights Commission have filed a petition seeking to overturn the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024, warning that it grants the state unfettered power to surveil, silence, and even endanger citizens who criticize the regime.

Mr. William Ruto signed the contentious law on October 15, 2025, despite growing concerns that it could exacerbate state-sponsored repression.

At the heart of the challenge is a sweeping clause criminalizing the publication of what the law vaguely calls “false, misleading, or mischievous information.” The petitioners argue that this vague and overbroad definition effectively grants the regime the discretion to determine what constitutes truth and to punish those who speak out against it.

The law compels all social-media users to verify their accounts using their government-issued legal names, a move the petitioners say opens the door to state surveillance, profiling, and intimidation of regime critics. The petition notes that this is especially dangerous in a country where human rights defenders, journalists, and activists have historically been abducted, tortured, or killed after speaking out.

“The mandatory verification requirement constitutes a blanket infringement of the right to privacy under Article 31 of the Constitution,” the petition reads. “It forces the unnecessary revelation of private affairs and directly infringes upon the privacy of communications.”

Kigame and KHRC warn that the law would make anonymity, long a shield for whistleblowers and victims of state violence, illegal. It also forces digital platforms to rapidly remove posts flagged as offensive, and this will create a culture of pre-emptive censorship that silences online debate before it even begins.

“This law criminalizes speech on the basis of speculation,” the petition says. “It targets communication that the state claims could hypothetically cause harm, without any demonstrable link between expression and outcome.”

Kigame and KHRC also say the manner in which the bill was passed was itself unconstitutional, as it was not referred to or debated by the Senate, despite affecting functions that fall under county governments.

The Board of Directors and staff of the Kenya Human Rights Commission mourn with deep grief the passing of Comrade Raila Amolo Odinga on October 15, 2025, in India.

Baba, as he was fondly known in Kenya and beyond, was a renowned statesman and Pan-Africanist who will be remembered for his fearless fight for human rights, democracy, and justice. Despite what some may consider missteps in the latter years of his political life, his courage, sacrifices, and consistency in pushing for constitutionalism and democratic governance remain unmatched in modern-day Kenyan politics.

Throughout Kenya’s modern history, Baba played a key role in advancing human rights and democratic governance. His detention without trial in the 1980s for opposing one-party rule symbolized a broader struggle for political freedoms. He was at the forefront of the push for multiparty democracy in the early 1990s. He later became one of the key political figures supporting the reform movement that led to the adoption of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.

Over the years, Baba consistently spoke out against state repression, championed electoral justice, and supported grassroots movements demanding accountability. His leadership during the constitutional referendum campaigns and post-election reform processes reflected a deep commitment to expanding civic space and strengthening democratic institutions.

Baba’s towering contributions to the struggle for a just society, as a compatriot and a general of the struggle, are woven with commitment and sacrifice for justice and the greater good of all people. He fought in the courts, in Parliament, in government boardrooms, and on the streets, always driven by the conviction that personal sacrifice was part of the arc of history. Whether confronting authoritarianism, demanding accountability, or defending civic freedoms, his voice was never silenced by injustice.

Since KHRC’s formation in 1992 as a non-governmental organization, Baba, through various political formations, has stood among our closest collaborators as we pursued our vision of a democratic, pro-people, rights-respecting state and society. This bond is anchored in our shared history and DNA. KHRC is a political advocacy organization founded by political activists and human rights defenders committed to transformative change through a robust and free civil society.

Our engagement with Baba was particularly significant during the constitutional and political reform struggles of the 1990s. He stood in solidarity with human rights defenders at critical moments, including joining protests in Nairobi during the campaigns against extrajudicial killings that we led. He was among the most accessible political leaders during the grand coalition government, listening to civil society ideas and often moving them forward through political channels.

We have sustained this strategic engagement and partnership over the years. A notable example was on November 8, 2023, when Baba was the chief guest at a joint launch by KHRC and the Mau Mau War Veterans Association of the veterans’ foundation, website, and book.

We honour his sacrifices and celebrate Baba’s revolutionary achievements in the struggle for a just Kenya. We extend our heartfelt condolences to Mama Ida Odinga, their children, the wider Jaramogi family, and the people of Kenya, and renew our commitment to stay the course in delivering a democratic state and society.

Baba, may you rest in Power. Your political spirit lives on.

Co-signed
Maina Kiai, Board Chairperson | Betty Okero, Board Vice-Chairperson | Nerima Wako, Board Member | Kwamchetsi Makokha, Board Member | Lorna Dias, Board Member | Gabriel Dollan, Board Member | Wanjiru Gikonyo, Board Member | Davis Malombe, Executive Director and Secretary to the Board