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.