"Natembeya demands answers from Inspector-General of Police, says repeated move raises constitutional concerns"
Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya has protested the repeated withdrawal of his security detail, demanding an explanation from the Inspector-General of the National Police Service over what he says could undermine constitutional safeguards and the rule of law.
The governor said the withdrawal, which he claims has happened for the second time, raises serious questions about transparency, procedural fairness and the criteria used by security agencies when reviewing protection for elected leaders.
In a strongly worded statement, the governor insisted that while security agencies have the authority to review protection arrangements, such decisions must be guided by the Constitution rather than arbitrary considerations.
“Any decision affecting my security must therefore comply with the applicable constitutional and legal requirements,” he said.
He invoked Article 47 of the Constitution, which guarantees every person the right to administrative action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair.
Natembeya argued that decisions adversely affecting a person's rights should be accompanied by written reasons where required by law, adding that affected individuals should not be left guessing about the circumstances behind such decisions.
“Public power must be exercised within the law. Constitutional guarantees cannot be ignored simply because a decision is made by a government institution,” he said.
The governor also cited Article 238(2)(b), which requires national security to be pursued in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law, while respecting democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms.
He further referred to Article 244, which requires the National Police Service to uphold professionalism, discipline, human rights and human dignity.
Against that background, he challenged Inspector-General of Police to explain the reasons behind the latest withdrawal and clarify whether the appropriate procedures had been followed.
“I therefore call upon the Inspector-General of the National Police Service to provide a formal explanation of the reasons for this decision and to clarify whether the applicable security procedures have been followed,” he said.
The governor also drew attention to a High Court ruling reportedly delivered on June 3, 2025, concerning the withdrawal of security assigned to five governors.
According to his account, the court found that withdrawing security without prior written notice, an opportunity to be heard and written reasons violated Article 47 of the Constitution.
He urged authorities to consider the judicial pronouncement when making decisions affecting the protection of public officials.
However, the governor was keen to distinguish his objection from a demand for special treatment, saying he recognised that security arrangements could legitimately be reviewed.
“Let me be clear: I do not claim immunity from lawful security reviews,” he said.
“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.”
His remarks underscore the tension between the security agencies' responsibility to assess threats and allocate protection according to operational requirements and the constitutional obligation to exercise public power fairly.
The governor maintained that the controversy would not distract him from serving the people of Trans Nzoia, saying his commitment to his constitutional responsibilities remained unchanged.
“As an elected Governor, I remain committed to discharging my constitutional responsibilities to the people of Trans Nzoia. I will not be distracted from serving the public, defending constitutionalism or upholding the rule of law,” he said.
He called on the relevant authorities to explain the repeated withdrawal and ensure that appropriate security arrangements were maintained in accordance with the law.
“The Constitution is binding on every public institution. No exercise of public power is above the law, and no Kenyan should be denied procedural fairness,” he said.
Ends
