By Maundu Mbullo and Toven Apondi
While scepticism in journalism plays a vital role in maintaining government accountability, it is crucial that the portrayal of empowered local administrators is nuanced and balanced. In an ideal world, acknowledging the complexities of local governance and reporting on success stories alongside the challenges, journalists can encourage a healthier public discourse.
The Standard’s lead story on December 3, 2025, was about the President William Ruto’s plans to enhance the powers of chiefs. It documented the President meeting with close to 15,000 chiefs and assistant chiefs at State House Nairobi, where he referred to them as a crucial link between the government and citizens, and a key enabler of the government’s transformation agenda. The President also said that the administrators were responsible for communicating the government’s message at the grassroots level and combating misinformation and fake news on social media about what the government is doing. The paper went on to draw parallels between this meeting at State House and similar meetings that were frequent in the 1980s, a time when chiefs were used to harass citizens and force them to register as members of the ruling party KANU before the reintroduction of multi-party politics.
The same paper of December 10, 2025, carried the headline “Killing the Mara,” spotlighting a crisis decades in the making featuring land grabbing, wildlife killings, blocked migration routes, and powerful individuals circling the reserve like vultures with title deeds.
At the centre of this saga sits a 4,720-acre prime parcel in Talek, controlled by Livingstone Kunini -brother to Governor Patrick Ntutu – after a Court of Appeal ruling allowed him to retain possession. For over 20 years, he has wrestled with the Narok county government over Olkiombo, a central heritage zone of the Maasai community.
Meanwhile, the Mara’s lions are dying at a rate that would make even hyenas pause mid-laugh. Lorkulup, Oloisipa, and the vanishing of Olobor have sparked global outrage. KWS blamed territorial fights, yet conservationists point to poisoning. The revelations in the story should be a subject of inquiry by the Tourism ministry and the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA)
On chiefs, the story also had testimonies of people who experienced the power chiefs had in the 1980s, including arbitrary detentions that violated the detainees’ human rights. It highlighted how these past experiences would make citizens spooked by the trajectory the present-day empowerment of chiefs is taking, as similarities were starting to emerge. An argument was made on whether the measure to arm chiefs was a step large and consequential enough to require public participation. The role chiefs play in Kenyan society requires them to appear as counsellors or advisors in communities, and not as adversaries or brutal law enforcers.
The story questioned the President’s motivation to empower chiefs, while also contextualising the fear of the dreaded powerful chief making a comeback. It further detailed the deployment of Administration Police throughout the country and quoted governance expert Prof Gitile Naituli warning that the groundwork was being laid for the return of the powerful chief of the 1980s who will have to deal with a completely empowered citizen who knows their rights and is already used to enjoying these rights.
The chiefs’ story raised critical questions on the broader implications of the ongoing initiative for democratic governance. On the other hand, the Masai Mara story paints a painful picture on the future of one of Kenya’s most consequential national resources whose survival is threatened. The two issues deserve a slot in policy debates.
