Natembeya says his security withdrawn hours after Ruto’s Trans Nzoia tour

By  Evans Jaola

Contributor

NTV

Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya has demanded a formal explanation from Inspector-General of Police Douglas Kanja over the withdrawal of his security officers, citing constitutional safeguards and a High Court ruling on the removal of protection assigned to governors.

State security officers attached to the Trans Nzoia Governor were withdrawn at around 11pm on Wednesday, just hours after President William Ruto concluded his tour of the county, where he visited Kiminini and Cherangany constituencies.

In a statement posted on Thursday, Mr Natembeya questioned the decision to withdraw his security for the second time, insisting that any review of his protection must comply with the Constitution and the law.

The reasons for the latest decision remain unclear, and the National Government had not issued an official explanation by Thursday morning.

“I call upon the relevant authorities to clarify this matter, provide the reasons for the repeated withdrawal and ensure that appropriate security arrangements are maintained in accordance with the law,” Mr Natembeya said.

His communication director, Dr Felix Sialo, confirmed the withdrawal to the Nation early Thursday morning, expressing concern over the move and indicating that the governor would address the matter publicly.

“Yes, my boss’s security was withdrawn last night around 11pm. He will make a public statement later today, but we are concerned by the move,” Dr Sialo had said.

Natembeya invokes constitutional safeguards

In his statement, the governor cited Article 47 of the Constitution, which guarantees every person the right to fair administrative action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair.

He argued that any decision affecting his security must comply with the applicable legal requirements, including the provision of written reasons where a right or fundamental freedom has been adversely affected.

He also cited Article 238, which requires national security to be pursued in compliance with the law and with respect for the rule of law, democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Further, he referred to Article 244, which requires the National Police Service to maintain high standards of professionalism and discipline and respect human rights and human dignity.

The governor called on Mr Kanja to explain the reasons for the withdrawal and clarify whether the relevant security procedures had been followed.

“Let me be clear: I do not claim immunity from lawful security reviews. What I insist upon is that any such review must be conducted professionally, objectively and in accordance with the Constitution, without discrimination or improper political influence,” he said.

Previous withdrawal

The latest incident revives a dispute that emerged in November 2025, when the government withdrew the governor’s security, prompting him to accuse President Ruto of seeking to intimidate him over his criticism of the administration.

At the time, Mr Natembeya told the Nation that he believed the decision had been made at the highest level of government.

“I personally blame the President for this because this is a decision made at a very high level and I know it’s a plan to intimidate me. I know were it possible even the vehicles I use could have been taken away,” he said on November 27, 2025.

He maintained that security was a constitutional privilege for an elected leader and vowed not to be intimidated into abandoning his political positions.

“Security to me is not a favour, it’s a constitutional privilege to me as an elected leader; it’s unfortunate but I will not fear nor accept this intimidation to disrupt my push for unity of the people of Western Kenya and asking questions regarding governance of this country,” he said.

During the previous dispute, the governor also accused the government of using various means to intimidate him, citing Senate summons, proceedings involving the National Cohesion and Integration Commission and what he described as trumped-up charges in the Anti-Corruption Court in Nairobi.

The allegations were his own characterisation of the disputes and were not established as the reasons for the current withdrawal.

High Court ruling on governors’ security

Mr Natembeya drew attention to a High Court ruling delivered on May 29, 2025, in a case concerning the withdrawal of security assigned to five governors. The decision was reported on June 3, 2025.

In the case, Justice Lawrence Mugambi ruled that withdrawing protective security from public officers without prior written notice, an opportunity to be heard and written reasons violated Article 47 of the Constitution and the applicable government policy.

The case involved security assigned to governors Ochilo Ayacko, Gladys Wanga, James Orengo, Anyang’ Nyong’o and Simba Arati.

The court held that the provision of protective security to public officers should be based on an assessment of their duties and the risks associated with their positions, and that withdrawal must follow due process.

Mr Natembeya urged the relevant authorities to take the judicial pronouncement into account when reviewing his case.

The ruling provides a legal context for his demand for an explanation, although the circumstances surrounding the latest withdrawal of his security have yet to be officially established.

Fresh accusations

The latest development also comes amid renewed political friction between the governor and Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen.

On Monday, during an event at Sibanga Secondary School in Cherangany, Mr Natembeya, accompanied by Cherangany MP Patrick Simiyu, accused the Cabinet Secretary of pursuing a personal vendetta against him.

Neither the governor’s earlier allegations nor the timing of the latest security withdrawal establishes a connection between the political disputes and the decision.

The National Government had yet to publicly explain the withdrawal by Thursday morning. Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja was not immediately available for comment.

Mr Natembeya said he remained committed to discharging his constitutional responsibilities to the people of Trans Nzoia and would continue to defend constitutionalism and the rule of law.

“No exercise of public power is above the law, and no Kenyan should be denied procedural fairness,” he said.

Follow ourWhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.