President William Ruto has contradicted himself on whether he should be held responsible for the victims of police brutality during the June 2024 and June 2025 anti-government protests.

Speaking to an international television station on Sunday, November 9, 2025, the Head of State distanced himself from the controversial “shoot the leg” directive that was widely interpreted as a green light for excessive police force.

In his remarks, President Ruto said the law does not allow him to issue any orders to the police, insisting that the National Police Service operates independently.

“There is nowhere in the law that allows me to order the police,” Ruto said. “The media is independent in Kenya, and they write all manner of stuff.

“They say all manner of things about me. They are free to lie and channel falsehoods. That is them.”

Read Also: President Ruto Denies Claims Of Abductions And Enforced Disappearances In Kenya

The president’s statement appeared to shift responsibility away from the State House regarding police actions during the deadly demonstrations that saw dozens of protesters injured or killed.

However, just minutes earlier in the same interview, President Ruto defended his past comments on the use of force by the police, saying he had no regrets about his “shoot the leg” directive.

“I do not regret those comments at all because the law allows the police to use force when other people’s lives are in danger.

“The police know what they need to do and understand what is in their purview,” Ruto stated.

The two conflicting statements have since sparked fresh debate over the president’s position on police accountability, with critics arguing that Ruto was attempting to sanitise his earlier stance by portraying himself as detached from operational commands.

Human rights groups and opposition leaders have continued to demand answers from the government regarding the deaths and injuries recorded during the protests.

Observers note that the president’s remarks could undermine efforts to address police reform and accountability, as he appears to alternate between supporting the use of force and disowning responsibility for its consequences.