IG Mutyambai Explains Why Police Have Been Disrupting Ruto’s Meetings While Sparing Others

Inspector General of Police Hillary Mutyambai has finally addressed the issue of selective application of enforcing the law on public gatherings.

Mutyambai was on Monday October 12, 2020 forced to speak following an uproar from Deputy President William Ruto’s allies.

DP Ruto’s allies have been unable to hold any public gathering since the government through Head of Public Service Joseph Kinyua on Thursday last week directed that all public meetings and processions around the country should be held in compliance with the Public Order Act.

Kinyua said the conveners should be present throughout the meeting or procession and shall assist the police in maintain law and order, and should inform the police three days prior to their meeting.

However, some other politicians have been holding meetings, with latest being ODM leader Raila Odinga’s meetings over the weekend, where he successfully hosted a delegation from Mt Kenya region at his Bondo home on Saturday, and held a church fundraiser within the same area on Sunday.

DP Ruto allies were on the other hand teargassed in Mumias, and a church fundraiser which was to be attended by DP Ruto cancelled over claims that their meeting were against the set restrictions.

However, IG Mutyambai explained that the National Police Service authorizes public gatherings after ascertaining that there is no risk of violence or attack on the particular group.

Through his #EngageTheIG hashtag on Twitter, Mutyambai noted that authorization is declined for safety of the public and the properties around the said area should police establish any possible risk.

He further noted that the groups that there are groups that have not attracted any form of violence while others have attracted violence, hence varied authorizations.

“I have taken note of complaints about selective application of enforcing the law on public gatherings. National Police Service authorizes public gatherings after ascertaining that there is no risk of violence or attack on the particular group. Should we establish any possible risk, then authorization is declined for safety of the public & the properties around the said area. There are groups that have not attracted any form of violence while others have attracted violence, hence varied authorizations,” he explained.