Faith, Irungu express their position on Ruto protest victims panel

Two members appointed to President William Ruto’s Panel of Experts on Compensation of Victims of Protests and Riots have publicly distanced themselves from its activities, deepening questions over the panel’s credibility even before it begins work.

This was on the day that the panel suspended its operations following conservatory orders issued by the High Court in Kerugoya.

In a statement released on its X account, the panel said it had filed an application seeking to set aside the orders but would, in the meantime, comply with the court’s directive.

“The panel, in compliance with the court orders, had suspended its operations and will continue to comply with the court orders until further directions from the court,” the statement read.

Law Society of Kenya President Faith Odhiambo and Amnesty International Kenya Executive Director Irungu Houghton separately issued statements stressing that, beyond their swearing-in, they have not participated in any meetings or engagements with the panel.

Their clarifications come amid mounting public criticism, raising questions if they may already be on their way out.

In a statement posted on her X account, Odhiambo said her commitment remains to the victims of police brutality, not to the State or opposition politics.

“It is my solemn patriotic duty and obligation to respect, uphold, and defend the Constitution of Kenya. Let it be clear that apart from the swearing in, I have not participated in any meetings or engagements with or for the Panel of Experts on Compensation of Victims of Demonstrations and Riots,” she said.

The appointment of Odhiambo, LSK President and Amnesty Kenya Director Houghton, both regarded as staunch defenders of the rule of law, has attracted sharp criticism from Kenyans, civil society organizations, and human rights groups.

Critics argue that the panel is unconstitutional and designed to blunt demands for justice. Rights groups maintain that there are already constitutionally mandated bodies tasked with addressing compensation for victims of protests and police brutality.

“I respect the rule of law and abide by the orders given by the High Court. I would like to emphasise that I do not work for the Government of Kenya nor the opposition,” Odhiambo posted.

She added that her focus is on amplifying the voices of victims and pressing for accountability.

“I know there are many Kenyans who were killed and injured, while others have been profiled and taken to court over trumped-up charges.”

“I maintain the call to the ODPP to review the trumped-up terrorism charges against peaceful protesters; and shift focus on prosecuting the trigger-happy officers who were caught on camera using excessive force to undermine the right to freedom of assembly,” Odhiambo added.

The LSK President further pledged continued pro bono legal support for victims and survivors of police brutality across the country, emphasising that her devotion is to the people and her colleagues at LSK rather than to political interests.

“My call is to serve the people of Kenya and my learned colleagues at the Law Society of Kenya. To this end, I am consulting widely on this cause while keenly listening to the voices of the victims and those who still suffer in search of justice,” Odhiambo stated.

In his statement, Houghton struck a similarly cautious tone maintaining his position on compliance with judicial authority and respect for the rule of law.

“For the avoidance of any public doubt, I immediately suspended my participation in the Panel of Experts on Compensation of Victims of Protests and Demonstrations in accordance with Monday’s order by the High Court and my respect for the rule of law, constitution and judicial oversight,” Houghton posted on X.

“Let it be understood that apart from the swearing in, I have not participated in any meetings or activities with or for the Panel of Experts on Compensation of Victims in Protests and Demonstrations. I shall not do so until the High Court gives a way forward,” he added.

While distancing himself from the panel, the Amnesty Kenya director reaffirmed his commitment to the rights of the victims, calling for “judicial prosecution of all parties complicit in unlawful killings, reparations for victims, and non-recurrence of brutal protest policing.”

The twin clarifications expose the uneasy relationship between civil society and State-led initiative on protest-related abuses.

Critics of the panel argue it was conceived as a political move to deflect anger over police killings during the June 2024 Gen Z-led protests and subsequent demonstrations.

Tens of Kenyans particularly young protestors were killed in clashes with police, hundreds were injured, and scores detained under charges rights groups have dismissed as baseless.

“The government may have had a good intention to try and put together a system that was to provide compensation. I want to believe that that was good intention or political goodwill. However, we must also note that the panel will not come into place without the due process of the rule of law,” said International Commission of Jurists-Kenya Executive Director Eric Mukoya.

“The due process of the rule of law demanded that the systems that are currently available in the form of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, in the form of Victim Protection Boards, that is under the Attorney General, required to be activated,” Mukoya stated.

The establishment of the Panel and the appointment of the two human rights defenders has created a sharp divide within the civil society sector, with some supporting the initiative while others oppose it on grounds of legality.

On Monday, the High Court in Kerugoya suspended the panel’s operations, ruling that there were serious constitutional questions about its legality.

Victims’ families and advocacy groups have long argued that reparations and compensation cannot replace criminal accountability for officers implicated in the killings. They argue that while compensation schemes may provide relief, without prosecution of perpetrators, such measures risk becoming stifled gestures.

According to Mukoya, reparation must go beyond money to address the full scope of harm suffered by victims and families. This includes restoring livelihoods, offering families closure through disclosure of the truth, and ensuring accountability for perpetrators.

“When we talk about transitional justice, it means those responsible including police officers who shot, killed, or maimed, must face the rule of law."

"The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions must prosecute identified officers. We have CCTV footage, we have witnesses, and the Witness Protection Agency must safeguard them so they can testify without fear,” he emphasised.

The backlash has placed appointees such as Odhiambo and Houghton in a delicate position caught between public suspicion of government co-option and their own records as outspoken defenders of civil liberties.

Observers argue that their statements appear to be an effort to reaffirm independence and credibility, while emphasising their solidarity with victims.

Civil Society groups under the Police Reform Working Group had earlier warned that processes of the panel must be made within the law.

“We expected that the President and Professor Makau Mutua will go back and think as to why it is important to go back and reconstitute a legally recognised process through the Kenyan National Commission on Human Rights,” said Mukoya.

“The suspension of the panel, for me, is the right thing to have happened. Secondly, any work that the panel is going to do was going to be unconstitutional, but also a shortcut to some of the atrocities that this government has made Kenyans go through,” Mukoya added.