Due of the dismissal of prominent cases, Karua accuses President Ruto of being a dictator.

Martha Karua, the leader of the Narc Kenya party, has accused President William Ruto of acting like a tyrant over the alleged illegal withdrawal of high-profile cases involving his colleagues in the Kenya Kwanza Alliance.

Karua voiced his concerns regarding the rate at which cases involving senior politicians in the Kenya Kwanza administration, including fraud and corruption, are being dismissed during his remarks on Thursday, November 17, at the Uganda Human Rights Accountability Conference, which the Kenya Human Rights Commission hosted in Nairobi.

She expressed concern that Kenya’s senior officials were taking the nation in a risky direction.

“I see the making of a dictator in Kenya. Cases are being withdrawn, be it fraud, murder, whatever, they are all being withdrawn. Something is cooking in Kenya and this is the making of dictatorship,” she said.

The former presidential running mate of the Azimio la Umoja – One Kenya alliance swore to defend the rule of law and declared that she would never remain silent when injustice is practiced.

“Our silence will make a dictator worse than we have seen. I will not be silenced. I am always inspired by Juliani’s song, “Sitanyamaza (sitasimama) maovu yakitawala”. (I will not shut up when evil is thriving). As long as I have breath, I will raise my voice whenever necessary,” Karua said. 

Karua was alluding to a number of cases, including the recent withdrawal of the Ksh7.3 billion corruption lawsuit against Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua amid allegations that it was politically motivated.

On November 10, a Nairobi court granted the Directorate of Public Prosecutions permission to drop the case against Gachagua and nine other defendants due to a lack of evidence.

The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), according to the DPP, made partial disclosure of the case’s evidence to the court, which affected their conclusion.

The DPP through State Counsels lead by Vera Hamisi stated, “The DPP independently evaluated the matter and found that the material did not satisfy the evidential standard required to equate to a successful prosecution of this case.”