By Maximilla Wafula
Gilgil -A fierce political storm has erupted in Kenya after startling allegations surfaced that President William Ruto and his administration may have been involved in the issuance of Kenyan passports to individuals linked to armed militias and sanctioned groups a claim that critics say could amount to an impeachable offence and serious national security risk.
The controversy intensified following public disclosures by activists and legal observers who allege that several foreign nationals, including figures associated with Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), may have obtained Kenyan passports under circumstances that bypassed the country’s established immigration and vetting procedures. Among the names highlighted in public documents was that of Algoney Hamdan Dagalo Musa, reported to be the younger brother of one of the most senior commanders of the RSF, a paramilitary force that has been accused by international human rights observers of widespread abuses in the ongoing Sudan conflict. The man is reportedly under sanctions by both the United States and the European Union, and his documented possession of a Kenyan passport has shocked many observers.
Former Chief Justice and presidential aspirant David Maraga has publicly condemned the revelations as deeply troubling, warning that if true, such actions go beyond clerical errors and strike at the heart of Kenya’s constitutional order, diplomatic standing, and commitment to countering terror and violent extremism. Maraga has argued that Kenya’s neutrality in regional diplomacy could be seriously undermined and that the credibility of Kenyan passports internationally could be damaged if the matter is not transparently addressed.
Legal experts and civil liberties advocates have also demanded explanations from government authorities on how such travel documents were issued, pressing for full disclosure of application records, vetting outcomes, and any internal directives tied to the approvals. A lawyer has formally sought access to details surrounding 28 passports allegedly granted to foreign nationals under irregular terms, pointing to substantial gaps between legal requirements which include possession of a valid national identity card, verified payments, and security clearances and what appears to have transpired.
Public skepticism is now running high, with critics asserting that circumventing strict passport procedures for individuals linked to armed groups sanctioned for atrocities could expose Kenya to international censure, sanctions, and threats to its diplomatic relationships. Former diplomats and security analysts warn that this imbroglio could compromise Kenya’s role in regional mediation efforts and even place the country at risk of secondary sanctions due to perceived exploitation of national documentation systems.
In response, government offices have remained largely silent or non-committal, with the Directorate of Immigration Services yet to provide a full accounting of the passport records in question or respond to calls for an independent probe. Critics argue that this absence of clarity only deepens public suspicion and could fuel demands for accountability that stretch into Kenya’s broader political landscape, including parliamentary oversight and judicial review.
As the allegations spread across media and social networks and reverberate throughout political circles in Gilgil and beyond, many observers see this issue as more than a procedural controversy framing it instead as a defining test of Kenya’s sovereignty, commitment to the rule of law, and the integrity of its citizenship documentation system in the lead-up to crucial national elections.
Comments
Post a Comment