Njiru Accuses Ruto of Designing Systems to Facilitate Corruption

Nairobi, Kenya — September 25, 2025

Lawyer and political commentator Ndegwa Njiru has launched a biting critique of President William Ruto, alleging that many systems introduced by the administration — including eCitizen and the Social Health Authority (SHA) payment platform — were engineered to siphon public funds rather than serve Kenyans. His remarks came during a political interview broadcast on a local radio station.

The Latest

• Njiru asserted:

  “You cannot speak about corruption when President William Ruto himself created the systems stealing from Kenyans, like e-Citizen, which all departments must use.” 

• He had earlier questioned the President’s credibility regarding SHA, calling Ruto a “fox guarding the henhouse” in relation to ongoing corruption probes. 

• On his X account, Njiru wrote:

  “The day Kenya fights corruption for real, Pres. Ruto won’t be the hero; he will be the casualty.” 

Context & Why It Resonates

• The SHA scheme has been under intense public scrutiny amid allegations of mismanagement and delayed payments to providers. Many private hospitals have suspended services under the SHA citing unpaid claims.

• The eCitizen platform is Kenya’s government portal for essential services — passports, business registration, licensing, and more. Njiru’s charge is that mandatory reliance on this system gives the executive vast control over dispensation and oversight.

• In August 2025, Njiru challenged Ruto’s public statements on SHA accountability, arguing that enforcement is hollow as the perpetrators are embedded within the administration itself. 

Law, Policy & Institutional Issues

• If Njiru’s claims hold, they suggest institutional capture, where systems are designed to concentrate control in executive hands rather than distribute accountability.

• Under Kenya’s Constitution (Article 10, 232), integrity and accountability are core values of governance. Systems that enable misuse violate those principles.

• The Public Finance Management Act and other regulatory frameworks require transparency in public procurement, fund transfers, and audit trails. Critics argue these are often bypassed or weakened in the implementation of digital systems like eCitizen and SHA.

Voices & Reactions

• As of now, no official response from the Presidency or Ministry of ICT has been reported regarding Njiru’s allegations.

• Civil society groups and anti-corruption activists have in past months also raised concerns over design flaws and opacity in SHA and eCitizen systems.

• Analysts caution that such claims, even if unproven, can erode public trust in digital government services — which are central to the administration’s narrative of reform.

Evidence & Data Highlights

Risks, Implications & Scenarios

Risks

• If such claims gain traction, they may deepen public skepticism toward digital reforms and discourage uptake of e-government services.

• The government may face increased pressure to open system audits or allow independent oversight of platforms like eCitizen and SHA.

• Political polarization could intensify, with the executive defending systems and opposition criticizing their design.

Implications

• The burden shifts to the Presidency and relevant ministries (ICT, Health, Finance) to demonstrate transparency with system logs, procurement records, and data access controls.

• Possible investigations: parliament, auditor general, or ethics commissions may be urged to audit these systems.

• If systemic weaknesses are confirmed, reforms or redesigns of digital government platforms may follow.

Scenarios to Watch

1. Defensive posture: The State asserts systems are secure and properly audited.

2. Limited concessions: Partial audit or oversight promise, but protections withheld.

3. Full transparency: Opening up system records, independent audits, reforms in design and permissions.

What We Don’t Know Yet

• The exact mechanisms Njiru alleges were built into eCitizen or SHA to enable exploitation (backdoors, privileged access, procurement rigging).

• Whether he has access to internal system logs, contract documents, or whistle-blower testimony to back his claim.

• How many users or institutions have experienced failures or losses attributable directly to system design.

• Whether any oversight body (e.g. Auditor General, Office of the ICT Authority) has initiated audits of these systems.

Timeline

• August 2025: Njiru previously criticized Ruto’s handling of SHA in a People Daily article. 

• September 2025: Njiru’s radio interview airs, and his accusation about system design becomes public.

• To follow: Potential responses, audit calls, parliamentary scrutiny.

What to Watch

• Whether the Presidency or ICT Ministry issues a formal rebuttal with technical details about eCitizen and SHA design.

• If the Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) or Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission triggers investigations.

• Deployment of system audits or forensic reviews of SHA and eCitizen logs.

• Whistle-blower disclosures or leaks about system-level vulnerabilities or abuses.