A recent claim by former Public Service Cabinet Secretary Justin Muturi has stirred debate about how President William Ruto handles crises when economic interests are at stake. Muturi, who has become one of Ruto’s strongest critics, says that at one point the President panicked over a perceived security threat.
In Muturi’s telling, this led Ruto to shun a group of American investors who were ready to meet him about business opportunities, showing a failure to balance national security and economic priorities.
According to Muturi, the trouble began when Ruto was shown a video suggesting that one of his associates had been abducted by police officers.
Disturbing as that was, the allegation caused immediate alarm at State House. Ruto supposedly called the then Inspector General Japhet Koome to get answers, but Koome claimed no knowledge of the matter.
He did promise, however, to alert police stations across the country just in case. Muturi says that after failing to get clarity at that level, Ruto then involved the Director-General of the National Intelligence Service.
Muturi uses this to show how deeply troubled the President was by what he considered a security emergency.
While this was happening, Muturi says, Ruto abandoned his other duties particularly a planned meeting with American investors.
They had come to explore investment in Kenya, expecting to talk directly with the President.
But, per Muturi, Ruto chose to focus on the security scare instead, leaving the delegation waiting. The investors were reportedly frustrated, which according to Muturi sent a message that Kenya does not always take investor confidence seriously.Muturi believes that what might seem a single mistake actually reflects a troubling pattern.
When under pressure, he argues, Ruto tends to become reactive, allowing fear to override planning.
In this case, it meant a missed chance to impress foreign partners, to show Kenya was stable, reliable, open for business.
Muturi thinks such moments have lasting effects, they reduce trust, harm credibility, and may make investors wary of working with a country whose leadership appears to waver under stress.
Critics argue that leadership does involve difficult trade-offs. Security must come first when lives are possibly at risk. But Muturi’s version suggests Ruto did not just follow a necessary precaution rather, he allowed a threat real or imagined to derail economic engagement.
