A coalition of prominent Kenyan civil society organizations has filed a petition at the High Court seeking the removal of Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen from office. The move follows the CS’s controversial remarks allegedly instructing police officers to “shoot anyone” who approaches police stations or poses a threat to officers, sparking a nationwide outcry.
The petition, lodged on July 2, 2025, was brought forward by the Katiba Institute, Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Independent Medico-Legal Unit (IMLU), and other human rights organizations. The lobby groups assert that Murkomen’s comments amount to incitement to violence, violate the Constitution of Kenya, and represent unethical behavior that disqualifies him from holding public office.
What the Petition Against Kipchumba Murkomen Says
According to the joint statement released by the organizations, the petition is grounded on several constitutional and legal grounds. They argue that Murkomen’s “shoot-to-kill” directive is a violation of Article 33 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression while limiting speech that incites violence or causes harm.
The petition also references Article 10 (National Values and Principles of Governance) and Chapter Six (Leadership and Integrity) of the Constitution, asserting that Murkomen has fallen short of the ethical standards expected of public officers.
“The petition alleges that these comments constitute incitement to violence and unlawful acts and amount to unacceptable ethical conduct required of a public officer. The petition asks the court to find that the CS is unfit to hold public office,” the groups stated.
Legal Precedent and Constitutional Implications
In their arguments, the petitioners cited a 2022 High Court ruling that clarified the limits of police use of force. The ruling explicitly stated that firearms should not be used to protect property when other non-lethal means are available, especially in the context of peaceful protests.
The current petition argues that Murkomen’s statement not only contradicts this legal precedent but also opens the door to arbitrary killings and excessive force by police. This is especially alarming given the recent uptick in civilian deaths linked to law enforcement operations in Kenya.
Context of the Controversial Comments
Murkomen’s controversial directive came during a tense period of anti-government demonstrations across Kenya. On June 26, 2025, while addressing police officers, the Interior CS reportedly said:
“If anyone comes close to a police station or endangers the life of a police officer, shoot them. The government will protect you.”
The remarks were widely condemned across the political spectrum, with human rights lawyers, opposition politicians, and activist groups terming them reckless, irresponsible, and dangerous.
At a time when the country is grappling with rising reports of extrajudicial killings and police brutality, many critics argue that such a statement from the country’s top internal security official can be interpreted as sanctioning unlawful force.
Calls for Accountability and Ethical Leadership
The petitioners are now calling on the courts to hold Murkomen personally accountable for any injuries or deaths that may occur from June 26 onward, allegedly as a result of his directive.
“He should be held responsible for any individual who loses their life or suffers injury due to the excessive or unlawful use of force by the police, following his statement,” the petition reads.
The civil society groups are also urging the court to issue an order declaring that Murkomen is not fit to continue as a Cabinet Secretary, citing the Leadership and Integrity Act and various provisions of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
Murkomen’s Response: “My Words Were Taken Out of Context”
In response to the backlash, Murkomen defended himself by stating that his comments were “taken out of context.” He claimed he was merely emphasizing the right of police officers to defend themselves when faced with life-threatening situations.
“My statement was never about giving police officers a license to kill. I only stressed that they must protect themselves, the public, and property in cases of real and imminent danger,” Murkomen said during a press briefing.
Despite the clarification, many remain unconvinced. Critics argue that, given his position of authority, his words carry significant weight and influence, especially over security personnel.
Legal and Professional Fallout: Murkomen and Kindiki Under Fire
This is not the first legal trouble stemming from Murkomen’s remarks. On June 30, 2025, a separate petitioner moved to the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) seeking to have both CS Kipchumba Murkomen and Deputy President Kithure Kindiki struck off the roll of advocates.
The complainant contended that both leaders had breached their constitutional oaths and the Code of Conduct for Advocates by making statements that could endanger public safety and undermine the rule of law.
If successful, this could strip both leaders of their status as lawyers, dealing a significant blow to their professional and political reputations.
Broader Implications: Human Rights and Use of Force in Kenya
This petition comes amid growing calls for police reforms in Kenya, especially regarding the use of force during protests and law enforcement operations. Human rights watchdogs, including Amnesty International Kenya and the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA), have been documenting cases of police brutality for years.
The Interior Ministry, which Murkomen heads, has been under intense scrutiny following the recent wave of anti-government protests, with numerous reports of civilian casualties, unlawful arrests, and use of live bullets by law enforcement agencies.
If the High Court rules in favor of the petitioners, it could set a powerful precedent for accountability and ethical governance in Kenya. The case also reaffirms the critical role of civil society and the judiciary in checking executive overreach.
Conclusion: A Defining Moment for Public Office Ethics in Kenya
The petition against Interior CS Kipchumba Murkomen marks a defining moment in Kenya’s evolving democratic landscape. It underscores the urgent need for leaders in public office to exercise caution, uphold constitutional principles, and act with integrity.
As the High Court prepares to hear the matter, Kenyans are watching closely. The outcome could not only affect Murkomen’s political future but also shape future interpretations of leadership accountability and the right to protest in Kenya.