How President Ruto is breaking records he would rather not

President William Ruto during development tour in Bungoma County on March 17, 2027. [PCS]

Past Kenyan presidents have at one point in time been accused of being corrupt, dictatorial and even unethical but President William Ruto has overtaken his predecessors, according to political pundits.

They opine that President Ruto has moved the bar to another level that may not be appealing to supporters and critics alike. The Head of state has cast aside decorum, targeting opposition leaders with insults, using unprintable words at public rallies.

He has teared into people's private lives, which observers say is unacceptable conduct that makes the Presidency a laughing stock.

The seat of power; State House and other offices such as the Harambee House have become comfort zones for controversial figures, including individuals accused of insurgency and corruption, despite protests from their home countries like Sudan and Zimbabwe.

The US sanctioned Algoney Hamdan Daglo Musa, the younger brother of RSF commander Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemdeti, but has been hosted by the President at State House while the RSF leaders have been issued with Kenyan passports in a move critics claim compromises Kenya’s integrity and national interests.

Questions have been asked about Wicknell Chivayo (also known as "Sir Wicknell") a Zimbabwean businessman and socialite known for his association with high-profile corruption scandals, including supply of electoral materials in Zimbabwe, and has faced similar accusations in South Africa and Namibia, especially visiting State House.

Today, critics say State House has been reduced into a deal-making centre, where influence is allegedly secured through inducements while Harambee House is reportedly under scrutiny following allegations that fraudsters have made it their stomping ground.

Ruto has been on the spot for engaging with leaders sanctioned for procuring weapons and financing ethnically motivated killings and sexual violence in Sudan.

In 2024, Ruto hosted Hemedti at State for ‘talks focused on finding a political settlement to the ongoing Sudan war’ a visit that sparked diplomatic fallout with Sudan's ruling council, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, criticising the reception of Hemedti, viewing it as a legitimisation of a rebel force, which prompted the recall of their ambassador in protest.

Opposition leaders now accuse Ruto of making Kenya a pariah State. Former Attorney General Justin Muturi claims the powerful institutions where policy directives should be established have become places for crooks who meet with the President to negotiate deals.

He says the hosting of Chivayo raises eyebrows on whether next year’s polls will be free and fair given that the businessman was ‘linked to foreign entities involved in disputed elections.’

The Democratic Party leader suggests that Chivayo is part of a wider network of "election fixers," grouping him with others previously accused of interfering with electoral technology in Kenya

 “This man is a convicted fraudster, on issues such as supplying faulty election materials in South Africa and Namibia and has been linked to election-related controversies in several countries. Whenever he visits Kenya he passes through Eldoret Airport, we must begin to ask what is it that they do with Ruto,” Muturi says.

He links Chivayo to Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa, saying the businessman’s political connections shields him from accountability. Chivayo has previously faced scrutiny over a multi-million dollar deal to supply election materials in Zimbabwe’s 2023 polls. Although authorities in Zimbabwe cleared him in December 2025, critics described the decision as a whitewash.

Investigations linked to related payments in South Africa are still ongoing, while Namibia’s opposition raised similar concerns during its 2024 elections.

President Ruto has also departed from discussing policies to hurling insults to his political rivals. Public discourse regarding Ruto’s leadership style frequently compares his confrontational rhetoric to the more restrained, technocratic approaches of predecessors Mwai Kibaki and Uhuru Kenyatta, with critics arguing that his public outbursts and insults degrade the dignity of the office.

They maintain that Ruto’s combative style, often utilising ‘below the belt politics, body shaming, addressing personal and family matters remove him from acting as a head of state to engagement in petty politics, hence diminishing the aura of the Presidency.

While Uhuru had his own challenges, he maintained a level of distance, which preserved the dignity of his position.

Uhuru was often described as more deliberate in his public demeanor, focusing on large infrastructure projects, while leaving his foot soldiers to respond to criticism. Dr Njoki Wamae, assistant professor in politics and international relations at United States International University-Africa (USIU), says Kibaki was largely seen as a technocratic leader who avoided public confrontations and insults.

“His conduct was widely regarded as dignified and rare in its public outbursts compared to current political discourse. Only in some instances he could use words such as mavi ya kuku, largely informed by his age,” she notes.

She says Ruto’s direct involvement in verbal battles makes him seem "too common" or desperate, reducing the respect for the office of the President, whereas his predecessors maintained a "rare and authoritative" persona.

According to Wamae, Ruto was voted in with hopes of raising the bar on the presidency, after promising to focus more on issues. She noted that despite Ruto being younger than his predecessors, he was playing politics in the 1980s. “There were hopes that with Ruto who presented himself as a God fearing, mannered and disciplined, Kenyan politics would mature but it seems we are in the era of 1980s when the founding President Mzee Kenyatta could use vulgar language and even whip leaders," she says.

According to her, it was regrettable that President Ruto could bully his opponents for being ‘fat’, a move she said was unethical and illegal, reminiscing how pupils could be disciplined for calling their colleagues ‘fatso’.

“It is unfortunate that with the country’s technology advancements, with the AI developments, we can have a backward President who results in name calling and insults. He needs to be reminded that he is the President whether or not he is insulted by the Opposition, he is the symbol of national unity.” 

Political analyst Herman Manyora opines that although Kenyan politics have been characterised by personalised attacks, President Ruto has taken the modus operandi a notch higher. He says the emergence of coalitions of political parties, civilisation, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) charges against Kenyan leaders were some of the factors that restored order in Kenyan politics but the country seems to be drawing back to archaic politics.

“When some Kenyan politicians were charged with crimes against humanity, the move restored discipline in our culture and it helped deal with stereotypes against communities such as Kikuyus and Luos, it's regrettable that slowly and gradually we are getting back to personal attacks,” argues Manyora.

"The President must realise that the seat he occupies is a seat of power, it is a revered institution, it’s like a monarch, a deity it is almost godly. If he reduces himself as a man like the rest of us, he won’t be respected. He must understand that he is more elevated than men. He has raw power; it is not an institution you take jokes about.”

However, Ruto’s allies claim the President was also human and needed to rebuttal his rivals who include former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua. Mbeere North MP Leo wa Muthende said Ruto responded to the insults levelled against him.

“If they want the President to be ‘presidential’ then they must respect him but if they attack him, he has every right to respond, Kenyans are actually happy to hear the President take on the opposition,” he says.

But Siaya Governor James Orengo dismisses the narrative and maintains that unlike Gachagua, it was Ruto who swore to protect the Constitution. “Gachagua has not taken an oath but the president has taken an oath to defend and protect the constitution. His utterances constitute an abomination; the only way the president can be called to order is by impeachment or a sanction by way of resolution in parliament. The constitution requires the President to promote values and principles and bring about peace in the country," he concludes.