Embakasi North Member of Parliament James Gakuya has challenged President William Ruto to provide detailed explanations regarding his allegations that former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua demanded Ksh10 billion, describing the accusation as a failed political strategy.

Speaking on Tuesday, April 8, 2025, Gakuya questioned the president’s motivations behind the explosive claim, suggesting it was designed to politically damage Gachagua but has instead backfired.

“I can tell you the reason why the head of state invokes that kind of allegation—he was intending to bombshell Gachagua and finish him with that kind of muddy allegation,” Gakuya stated.

According to the Embakasi North legislator, the accusation was aimed at painting Gachagua as a greedy leader but lacks important context and factual clarity.

“When somebody wants to put you to be a very greedy person by saying ‘I pushed you off because of demanding ten billion shillings’—did he explain what was the reason for that demand?” Gakuya questioned.

The MP expressed scepticism about the nature of the alleged demand, pointing out that the former Deputy President already held significant constitutional powers during his tenure.

“Gachagua was in power as a deputy president. He was very, very jealous, and it is important for the public to know. Don’t just blanket tell us what was the cause and source of the demand,” he continued.

Gakuya questioned the logic of Ruto’s claim, particularly the implication that the President needed Gachagua’s approval to tour the Mt Kenya region.

“You cannot tell us that Gachagua was demanding ten billion to allow you to move to Mt. Kenya to address Murima. That can never be. Because you have express power by the constitution to tour anywhere in the country, you do not require Gachagua,” the legislator argued.

The MP maintained that while the presidency holds the authority to move freely across the country, the public still deserves answers on the intent behind the allegation, especially considering the gravity of the figures involved.

“So he should give us an explanation and whether you are the head of state, you have come with the accusations, you have put a bombshell on the table. Tell us what was the intended ten billion for. That could be a very good answer for Kenyans to know,” Gakuya emphasized.

“We know Gachagua was salaried, and now he is demanding ten billion—what was it for?” he posed.

Ksh10 billion accusation

Gakuya’s remarks come a week after President Ruto publicly accused his former deputy of demanding Ksh10 billion to “talk to the Mt Kenya region.”

The president made the revelation during a media interview on March 31, 2025, at Sagana State Lodge, just before beginning a tour of the region.

Ruto claimed that Gachagua even threatened to make him a one-term president if he failed to meet the demand.

“He told me I would be a one-term president if I did not meet certain conditions. He asked for Ksh10 billion. I said I would not do it. If that means one term, so be it,” Ruto said during the interview with vernacular media stations.

Gachagua’s response

Gachagua on his part, has firmly denied the President’s allegations.

In an interview on April 7, 2025, the former Deputy President accused Ruto of fabricating the narrative to discredit him during his tour of the vote-rich Mt Kenya region.

“He cobbled this Ksh10 billion narrative to show the people of Mt Kenya that Gachagua is a very selfish man,” Gachagua said.

Asked directly if he had made the demand, he responded, “Of course, I did not blackmail the president.”

Gachagua further argued that if the claim were true, it would have featured prominently in the charges that led to his removal from office.

“If I did, it could have been accusation number one during the impeachment. This impeachment was crafted by President William Ruto, the National Intelligence Service, and Professor Kithure Kindiki,” he said.

He also pointed to inconsistencies in the statements of Ruto’s allies, including Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah and digital strategist Dennis Itumbi, who he said gave conflicting versions of the same claim.