•Tangatanga intended to depict KIeleweke in a bad light.
•Governor Waititu said his were recalled while 'on an assignment', which beats the logic of guarding him.
The explanation by the National Police Service that withdrawal of leaders’ security detail was part of police reforms was clear.
Why then would MPs turn around to oppose the reforms meant to beef up their own security? My reading of the remarks by Team Tangatanga is that they were intended to depict their rivals in Kieleweke in a bad light.
The political message was clear. “We have a right to be accorded security details but our rivals have conspired to take it away”. Regular police officers assigned to guard the VIPs shall be replaced with trained Administration Police officers according to the reforms. Governors would be assigned four armed officers each and one to each MP except in rare cases where an elected leader or a senior government official convinces the national security that his or her life is in danger, then they would be assigned more security.
It should be remembered that Kiambu Governor Ferdinand Waititu was among the first leaders to raise this matter. He said two of his bodyguards were recalled while in Mombasa where he had sent them for a special assignment. This brings to fore the question. Are you given bodyguards to protect you or send them to run errands? For Waititu, it was a bold admission that reaffirmed the position of NPS to drastically reduce the number of officers.
Kenya has a population of more than 45 million people. They also have the right to be protected. It is also, not only members of Tangatanga who raised concerns about their security.
I also heard two members of Kieleweke say their security detail was recalled but they did not politicise it. They were positive about the measures taken to reform the police because it is meant to guard them better.
Political Analyst and Blogger