22/09/2025
Opinion: Fueling the Police Risks Eroding Equal Access to Justice
By Insurance World TV Insurance World Tv
The recent remarks by Kenya’s Cabinet Secretary for Internal Security and National Administration, Sen. Kipchumba Murkomen, have brought to light a worrying development in the country’s approach to policing. The CS appeared to justify the practice of police officers requesting money for fuel from citizens who report crimes, arguing that each police station receives a modest allocation of 450 litres of fuel per month — an amount he acknowledged may be inadequate. He further suggested that citizen contributions are akin to “investing in security” to help the police discharge their duties.
While the explanation underscores the genuine resource constraints facing our police service, granting official legitimacy to this practice carries far-reaching implications for governance and public trust.
First, it risks institutionalising the privatisation of policing. Once officers are permitted to rely on citizen contributions, the state effectively abdicates part of its core responsibility — the provision of security — to individual households. This sets a precedent where citizens are no longer just taxpayers funding security through the national budget, but also direct financiers of day-to-day policing. Such a model erodes accountability and opens the door to abuse, as officers could demand fuel money even where budgeted allocations remain available.
Second, it creates a dangerous inequity in access to justice. Crime does not discriminate, but this policy would. In a scenario where the complainant must pay for fuel, wealthier citizens will see their cases acted upon swiftly, while poorer Kenyans risk neglect. The end result would be a two-tier security system: one for those who can afford to “invest” in it and another for those left exposed. This outcome undermines the constitutional principle that security is a right for all citizens, not a commodity for purchase.
Kenya’s security challenges require pragmatic solutions, but shifting the financial burden to wananchi is not one of them. The government must instead consider alternatives such as reviewing budgetary allocations, enhancing logistical efficiency, adopting fuel management technology, or exploring partnerships that guarantee consistent operational capacity without compromising equality of service.
Security is a public good, and its provision must remain the sole responsibility of the state. To allow otherwise is to compromise not only fairness in policing but also the integrity of our justice system.
What the Government Should Do Next
Review allocations: Reassess fuel budgets for police stations based on crime prevalence and geographic coverage.
Improve efficiency: Introduce fuel management systems to curb misuse and ensure optimal utilisation.
Leverage partnerships: Explore collaborations with county governments or private sector initiatives for logistical support.
Strengthen accountability: Establish transparent reporting on police resource usage to restore public trust.
Insurance World Tv
