Why Ruto should earn, not inherit a second term

President William Ruto addresses residents after the launch of the Sogoo-Melelo-Ololung'a road during a tour of Narok County, on May 7, 2025. [File, Standard]

In a democracy, no leader is entitled to power beyond the mandate freely given by the people. But here in Kenya, a troubling narrative has been gaining traction among President William Ruto's close allies that he must be granted a second term simply because his predecessors, Mwai Kibaki and Uhuru Kenyatta, each served two terms. This mindset is not only ahistorical and anti-democratic but is also deeply flawed and insulting to the intelligence and sovereignty of the Kenyan voter.

The Constitution is clear: A president is elected for a five-year term, renewable once through a fresh election. There is no automatic entitlement to a second term, only an opportunity to earn it through delivery on promises, accountability, and the will of the people. But this is where Ruto's allies have veered dangerously off course. They have reduced the presidency to a birthright, not a duty of service. It is being treated as an inheritance passed within political precedent, rather than a position earned through performance and bound by a social contract with the Kenyan people. Their obsession with consolidating power has blinded them to the suffering of ordinary citizens as they shamelessly weaponise loyalty and sycophancy over service. In their world, public office is no longer about public good, but about securing personal gain, shielding impunity, and feeding a political class so addicted to privilege that they would rather rewrite the rules than respect the Constitution and electorate's voice.