Ruto Chides Judiciary, Opposition in New Year’s Address

President William Ruto has ended 2023 by highlighting a few of his administration’s accomplishments.

In his new year’s address, the head of state subtly criticized the judiciary for some of its judgments.

Ruto acknowledged that he made some decisions that were difficult but will be advantageous in the long run.

He mentioned the implementation of new tax measures to increase tax revenues by Sh600 billion and cutting expenditure by up to Sh400 billion.

“The choices we have made over the last year were neither easy, populist, nor convenient; they were however meaningful, appropriate, and necessary,” the President said.

“Inflation has reduced to 6.8 per cent and our GDP is growing at the rate of 5.4 per cent, placing Kenya as the 29th fastest-growing economy globally.”

The President went on to say that the elimination of subsidies resulted in a 40% increase in food production at a fraction of the previous cost, and that millions of Kenyans were able to obtain employment through the housing program and explore business prospects both domestically and internationally.

He praised the housing initiative for giving common Kenyans the chance to own homes at 3% interest through a tenant purchase plan that costs Sh4,000 per month.

Furthermore, he declared that the government will launch a new social health insurance program in January that will not refuse low-income earners access to healthcare, continuing the reform of healthcare at the secondary and tertiary levels of care.

The President also chided the judiciary, accusing it of issuing decisions that go against the public interest and government policies.

While it is acceptable to question policies and keep the administration accountable, he asserted that the opposition, the Legislature, and the Judiciary must always ensure that the best ideas win in order to improve the welfare of the people.

Ruto stated that care must be taken to ensure that the people are not denied possibilities that are legally theirs, such as home ownership or access to healthcare, in the pursuit of maintaining constitutionalism, exercising institutional independence, and defending people’s rights.

“This is what happens when a public servant, enjoying a house mortgage at a 3 per cent interest rate, makes decisions that frustrate the housing programme, robbing millions of youth of employment prospects and denying millions of Kenyans the chance to own a home like them,” he said.

“This is also the case when a public officer, who benefits from unlimited medical insurance, invokes the law to derail universal healthcare delivery, denying millions of vulnerable Kenyans a health cover like them.”

“It is the case when a politician neglects the boundaries of democratic competition: that opposing policy does not permit undermining the nation or sabotaging the national interest or the welfare of the people.”