Murkomba Calls for Arrest of Muturi After Bombshell Takedown of Ruto
- The Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen has requested an investigation into the previous CS Justin Muturi regarding allegations of improper handling of sensitive governmental papers.
- Murkomen alleged that Muturi breached confidentiality rules and suggested that the previous attorney general might be subject to an arrest.
- The strain arose after Muturi alleged that his assigned security was removed because he criticized President William Ruto's administration.
DIWIDA.NEWS |.co.ke reporter Ivan Mboto boasts more than three years of expertise covering politics and contemporary issues within Kenya.
Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen has called for disciplinary measures against ex-Public Service Cabinet Secretary Justin Muturi, alleging he violated official secrecy rules.
Murkomen made his comments following Muturi’s statement that he kept confidential government papers in digital format, which the Interior Cabinet Secretary noted could lead to arrests in other regions.
On Tuesday, April 8, when addressing reporters in Mombasa, Murkomen called upon investigative bodies such as the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC), and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to investigateMuturi regarding his management of confidential data.
Murkomen asserts that keeping the documents—in what is allegedly Muturi’s personal email—amounts to an irregularity with potential criminal implications.
"He mentions that he has stored government papers via email. In another nation, he might have faced arrest. The protocol for managing official documents does not permit such actions," Murkomen pointed out.
Murkomen compared Muturi's actions to the 2015 incident with then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who faced significant scrutiny for using a private email server to manage sensitive data. He contended that consistent criteria must be applied regarding matters of national security.
"The files in question do not belong personally; they are assets of the government. It is unsettling to hear that they were being copied from the very beginning," Murkomen commented.
He additionally took issue with Muturi's assertion that he kept the papers as proof of being coerced by President William Ruto into engaging in corrupt activities.
Murkomen refuted the claims, urging Muturi to submit any supporting proof to the relevant investigating agencies rather than airing grievances publicly.
"I don't think anything he has stated rises to the level of corruption. However, if he genuinely possesses evidence, why did he delay until being invited? He recently entered the DCI's office voluntarily and could have done so again with this information," said Murkomen.
Murkomen clarifies the reasons behind the removal of Muturi's security.
To address Muturi’s security worries, Murkomen explained that the removal of his protection detail probably resulted from a standard reduction after he left the Cabinet.
He stated that he would seek a formal clarification from Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja, asserting that matters related to security are apolitical and fall under the purview of the IG.
"It might be reduced because he's no longer a CS. We shouldn't turn security issues into political ones. Without escalation, this isn't something I can decide," Murkomen pointed out.
earlier that day, Muturi had expressed concern about what he termed as an "intimidation tactic" employed by the government when he found out that his security team had been withdrawn without any clarification.
He claimed that the decision was a direct result of his critical position against the Ruto administration.
Murkomen is undertaking a weeklong security inspection across the nation's shoreline area.
Gachauga asserts he possesses covert audio recordings of Ruto’s proposal.
In another report, ex-deputy president Rigathi Gachgua shockingly claimed that Ruto tried to purchase his resignation with a sum ranging from KSh 1.5 to 2 billion.
Gachauga stated that the purported proposals were communicated via a high-ranking governmental official serving as an intermediary.
He additionally stated that these discussions occurred at a National Intelligence Service (NIS) secure location when he declined to meet at either the State House or a hotel.
Even though acknowledging that capturing footage of individuals contradicts his beliefs, Gachagna mentioned that he covertly recorded the gatherings and cautioned officials not to investigate his location, asserting that the recordings are safely kept in another place.
