The Broad Mongrel Government: Why Kenyans Must Not Be Fooled by Political Handshakes

Nairobi, March 10 – Kenya’s political elite have perfected the art of deception, dressing self-preservation as national interest. The so-called cooperation between President William Ruto and Raila Odinga is not about governance, reforms, or unity.  It is just an open, calculated political agreement masked as statesmanship.

Back in March 2022, while in the UK, as the then-deputy President, Ruto fiercely condemned the handshake between Uhuru Kenyatta and Odinga. He called it a mongrel—a confused and dysfunctional system. “We have a mongrel of a governance system – you don’t know whether the government is in the opposition or the opposition is the one that is in government,” he told a gathering at Chatham House.

After winning the presidency in August that year, Ruto vowed never to let the opposition into his government. He argued that strong oversight was key to holding those in power accountable. But words are cheap—who can find a man of his word? Today, Ruto is running the very system he once condemned. He started by picking off small politicians, buying their loyalty for cheap. Then he went for the real prize. Now, he has captured the “father of opposition” and placed him, along with his loyalists, at the heart of his government—given the full privileges, and influence.

The newly signed political unity pact between Ruto and Odinga is built on a ten-point agenda that blends proposed constitutional amendments with the implementation of existing laws. While it borrows from the NADCO report, it is most significant proposals—including the creation of the Official Opposition Leader and the Prime Minister’s office—do little to address Kenya’s real governance failures and the so-called unity deficit. The much-hyped NADCO report is not a panacea for change. It is merely a restatement of constitutional provisions that have been ignored for over a decade.

Inclusivity, devolution, leadership integrity, the fight against corruption, proper management of national debt, and the right to protest—among other recommendations in the NADCO report—are already enshrined in the Constitution. These do not require backroom political deals but bold, selfless leadership willing to put the country above personal ambition. What Kenyans are witnessing is not a partnership for progress but an alliance of convenience fueled by survival politics. This is not about uniting Kenyans for development or upholding the Constitution—it is a calculated move to consolidate power under the guise of unity. That is why Kenyans remain skeptical.

1. Inclusivity and Equal Representation (Article 27)

The Constitution, under Article 27, guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination, ensuring that all Kenyans have equal opportunities in political, economic, and social spheres. The NADCO report highlights the need for inclusivity, yet, nearly 15 years after the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution, successive governments have failed to uphold this principle. Political elites have continued to manipulate inclusivity as a bargaining tool rather than a constitutional obligation.

The NADCO report proposes the creation of the office of the Official Opposition Leader, and the Prime Minister aims to foster inclusivity. However, the true test of inclusivity is not in creating new political offices but in ensuring fair representation at all levels of governance, particularly for marginalized communities, women, and youth. The question remains whether this new arrangement is genuinely about inclusivity or merely a political power-sharing strategy.

2. Strengthening Devolution (Article 174)

Devolution was designed to bring governance closer to the people, as enshrined in Article 174 of the Constitution. However, county governments continue to face financial constraints, with the national government routinely delaying disbursements while tightening its grip on resources meant for devolved units. The Constitution guarantees financial autonomy for counties, but successive governments—including Ruto’s—have used budgetary allocations as a tool of control. The political pact acknowledges these challenges but fails to address the root cause: the national government’s unwillingness to fully adhere to the principles of fiscal devolution. The ongoing struggle for resources between the two levels of government undermines the spirit of devolution and raises concerns about whether the political power pact is necessary or will translate into real change or remain mere rhetoric. As many Kenyans have expressed, a handshake will not fix this. What is needed is adherence to the law, not political alliances.

3. Leadership and Integrity (Chapter 6)

The Ruto-Raila cooperation makes vague references to leadership and integrity, but this is another area where Kenya is ruling class has failed spectacularly. Chapter Six of the Constitution sets clear ethical standards for public officials, yet the country continues to be governed by individuals with questionable records. If Ruto and Odinga were to address the integrity question, they would not require the NADCO report or any constitutional amendments. It only requires well-meaning leaders to step down when implicated in corruption and abuse of office. Instead, the same faces accused of economic crimes continue to wield power, protected by the very system they now claim to reform.  The Constitution demands that state officers uphold high ethical standards, yet corruption and impunity continue to thrive. Time and again, political compromises have led to the dilution of accountability, with leaders shielding each other from scrutiny. Without a commitment to enforcing Chapter 6, the political pact between Ruto and Odinga is just another arrangement that serves the interests of political elites rather than the citizens who demand transparency and integrity.

4. The Right to Protest (Article 33)

The right to assemble demonstrate, and picket is protected under Article 33 of the Constitution. However, in practice, this right has been systematically undermined, with security agencies frequently using excessive force to suppress protests. Odinga, who has historically championed the right to protest, has himself been a victim of state suppression. Yet, under the new Ruto-Odinga cooperation, there is no clear commitment to ending the culture of police brutality against demonstrators. The youth-led protests in Roysambu against Winners Chapel Church yesterday were met with violent police repression, just days after Ruto and Odinga signed a MoU promising, among other things, to uphold the right to protest. This confirms that nothing has changed.

In fact, Odinga—once a victim of such crackdowns—is now complicit in suppressing this fundamental right. The recent wave of youth-led demonstrations against unemployment, corruption, and economic exploitation has only further exposed the government’s intolerance toward dissent. The deep frustration among Kenyans over government spending priorities was on full display as protests erupted in response to President Ruto’s Ksh 20 million donation and his additional Ksh 100 million pledge to the church—figures that sparked public outrage at a time when millions are struggling with the high cost of living.  If the political pact between Ruto and Odinga is to have any credibility, it must first prove that the state is willing to uphold citizens’ rights to express their grievances without fear of intimidation, violence, or state-sanctioned repression. Until Kenyans can freely voice their frustrations without state retaliation, any rhetoric about inclusivity and good governance remains an empty promise.

5. National Debt Crisis (Chapter 12)

Kenya’s public debt has ballooned to unsustainable levels for the last over 10 years, with citizens bearing the burden through increased taxation and economic hardships. Chapter 12 of the Constitution emphasizes prudent management of public finances, yet the government’s borrowing appetite has continued unabated. The NADCO report touches on the issue of national debt, but without a clear strategy for fiscal responsibility, the problem will persist. Despite a High Court order compelling the National Treasury to make public the country’s debt register, transparency remains elusive. The government continues to withhold crucial details about the actual debt burden, including the specific terms of loans, interest rates, repayment schedules, and the full list of lenders. This lack of disclosure continues to raise concerns about hidden debts, unsustainable borrowing, and the potential mortgaging of national assets.

The culture of secrecy surrounding public debt must be addressed to prevent further financial mismanagement and ensure accountability in government borrowing and spending. To walk the talk and for Kenyans to trust the commitments Ruto and Odinga signed last Friday at KICC, they must start with full transparency—beginning with the immediate release of the national debt register, as ordered by the High Court. Citizens have a right to scrutinize where public funds are going and whether economic policies genuinely serve the people. If this agreement were truly about economic reform, it would prioritize accountability over secrecy.

6. The Fight Against Corruption (Chapter 6 and Article 3)

Corruption remains one of Kenya’s biggest challenges, draining public resources and hindering economic development. Chapter Six and Article 3 of the Constitution mandate strict adherence to ethics and anti-corruption measures, yet there has been minimal commitment to enforcing these provisions. The rule of law (Article 3) demands that all Kenyans, regardless of status, be held accountable for economic crimes. While Ruto-Raila political agreement acknowledges the need to fight corruption, history shows that political alliances often weaken accountability mechanisms rather than strengthen them. Successive governments have failed to prosecute high-profile corruption cases, with perpetrators walking free due to political connections. If the Ruto-Odinga cooperation is to be taken seriously, it must go beyond rhetoric and lead to concrete actions, such as strengthening the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and ensuring that those implicated in graft face justice.

 The Grand Mongrel Government

Kenya’s democracy is anchored in multi-party politics, as outlined in Article 4 of the Constitution. However, political compromises often blur the line between democracy and expediency. History shows that political pacts and handshakes rarely bring real reforms. Without a commitment to upholding the Constitution and ensuring good governance, the current agreement is just another elite-driven arrangement that serves political interests over the people’s aspirations.

The fundamental question remains: Why do Ruto and Odinga need a handshake to implement what the Constitution already guarantees? The answer is simple—this is not about the Constitution or the country; it is about their political survival. True reforms require leaders who rise above petty interests and implement the law without seeking personal gain. Kenya does not need a political MoU to guarantee good governance—it needs leaders who respect the Constitution and serve the people, not their own ambitions.

Kenyans must remain vigilant. The promise of unity must not be used to justify a deal that benefits the ruling class while leaving citizens with nothing but empty slogans. If history has taught us anything, it is that in Kenya, political alliances come and go—but the people’s struggle for justice, accountability, and true democracy must continue.