Miguna argues that leaders who speak about the rule of law must also be willing to confront past injustices, regardless of the people involved.
His remarks have reignited debate about political consistency as Kenya moves closer to the 2027 General Election.
Miguna’s strongest criticism centres on his experience in 2018, when he was detained and deported from Kenya.
He accuses Sifuna of celebrating his suffering while presenting himself as a defender of constitutional rights.
The High Court declared Miguna’s deportation illegal in February 2018, ruling that the decision to remove him from the country was null and void.
This court ruling gives important legal context to the grievances he has raised.
The lawyer also questions the political arrangements involving former President Uhuru Kenyatta and former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, commonly known as the Handshake.
He further criticises the cooperation between ODM and President William Ruto’s UDA, arguing that leaders cannot support such arrangements and still claim to represent meaningful political change.
These are Miguna’s political accusations, reflecting his long-standing opposition to the alliances he describes.
He also takes issue with Sifuna’s alleged links to several political figures, including former Interior Cabinet Secretary Fred Matiang’i and other individuals whom he associates with impunity.
Miguna insists that constitutionalism should not depend on personal friendships, party loyalty or political convenience.
His argument is that leaders must apply the same standards to their allies as they do to their opponents.
In his closing remarks, Miguna says he opposed both Handshake arrangements and remains determined to expose what he considers double standards among political leaders.
His latest message puts Sifuna under renewed scrutiny, particularly as political alliances and presidential ambitions take shape ahead of 2027.
Whether Kenyans agree with Miguna or not, his criticism raises a central question: can political leaders credibly demand accountability from their opponents while overlooking the actions of their allies?
0 Comments