Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights, urging Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen and the government to allow former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua to exercise his democratic freedoms without intimidation.
In a TV interview on August 19, 2025, the former Trade CS emphasised that while he disagrees with Gachagua’s tribal politics, he opposes any attempts to silence him.
Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights remarks highlight tensions within Kenya Kwanza, raising concerns about the misuse of criminal allegations to curb political expression in Kenya’s evolving democratic landscape.
Kuria acknowledged past differences with Gachagua, particularly criticising his reliance on tribal politics, which he deemed outdated. “I pointed out the mistakes of Rigathi Gachagua, which I will still point out even today.
The politics of tribe have no space in our nation,” Kuria stated, advocating for modern, inclusive political discourse. However, he insisted that Gachagua’s right to engage in politics must be protected, provided it is done within the law.
His comments respond to Murkomen’s claims that Gachagua and his associates may be planning criminal activities, which Kuria cautioned could blur the line between legitimate political rivalry and targeted persecution.
The controversy stems from Murkomen’s recent statements implicating Gachagua in potential wrongdoing, prompting Kuria to call for restraint. “It beholds upon Kipchumba Murkomen; I have heard him say they have info to believe Rigathi Gachagua and the people around him want to commit a crime,” Kuria said, defending Gachagua’s political rights as sacrosanct.
He warned that conflating ideological differences with criminality risks setting a dangerous precedent, undermining Kenya’s democratic space.
This stance comes amid Gachagua’s strained relationship with the Kenya Kwanza administration, following his ousting as Deputy President in October 2024 over accusations of disloyalty and divisive rhetoric.
Social media reactions reflect divided sentiments, with some users praising Kuria for championing democratic principles, while others view his defence as a strategic move to counter government overreach.
Posts like “Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights, calling out Murkomen’s threats” gained traction, highlighting public interest in the feud.
Analysts suggest Kuria’s intervention aims to foster dialogue over confrontation, especially as Gachagua continues to rally support in the Mt. Kenya region, positioning himself as a vocal critic of the administration.
Kuria’s call for tolerance shows the need for open political engagement, warning that criminalising dissent could erode public trust. He urged resolving differences through debate rather than arrests, a sentiment echoed by opposition figures advocating for fair treatment of political adversaries.
The remarks also reflect internal Kenya Kwanza fractures, with Kuria aligning against heavy-handed tactics despite his criticisms of Gachagua’s approach.
As Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights, the government faces pressure to clarify its accusations against the former deputy. Murkomen’s claims, lacking specific evidence, risk fueling perceptions of political witch-hunts, particularly in a region sensitive to exclusionary tactics.
Moses Kuria defends that Gachagua’s political rights narrative has sparked calls for the Interior Ministry to prioritise evidence over rhetoric. With Gachagua planning public rallies, the government’s response will test Kenya’s commitment to democratic freedoms.
Kuria’s stance on Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights, emphasising a broader fight against tribalism while safeguarding political expression.
His warning against mixing rivalry with criminal allegations resonates as a plea for mature governance, urging Murkomen to avoid escalating tensions unnecessarily.
Moses Kuria defends Gachagua’s political rights, challenging the government to uphold democratic principles over punitive measures. As Kenya navigates this political storm, Kuria’s call for restraint and dialogue could shape the balance between accountability and freedom in the nation’s leadership.
