President Ruto Says Cybercrime Law Signing Coincided with Raila’s Death ‘By Bad Luck’

President William Ruto

President William Ruto has said the timing of his decision to sign the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Bill, 2024 was coincidental and not politically motivated.

The president signed the Bill into law on October 15, 2025, the same day former Prime Minister Raila Odinga passed away, drawing criticism from sections of the public and opposition leaders.

Speaking during the burial of the father to Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja on Thursday, October 23, President Ruto said the signing was part of his official duties for the day.

“I woke up on Wednesday, and the signing was my work for the day—it is a constitutional mandate,” he said. “I was to sign because the Bill had passed all stages and had been brought to me by the Speaker. But by bad luck, we lost one of our leaders.”

President Ruto and other government officials

Ruto said the signing took place earlier in the day before he travelled to Ukambani for a road development event.

“I was on duty just like any other citizen. There was nothing to hide—I was not doing anything at night,” the Head of State said.

He said the new law is aimed at addressing growing cases of cybercrime, including online harassment, digital fraud, and extremist propaganda.

“We are doing the right thing for Kenya. We want to protect our young people and the security of our country from situations that undermine our well-being,” he said.

The President called on critics to avoid politicising the matter, saying the amendments had been under review since 2024.

President William Ruto speaking at a past event

“Kenya must stand up to those who are using the digital space to spread terrorism. And we must say the truth—there are people who want to destroy Kenya by all means,” he said.

The Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024 has since faced legal challenges. The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and activist Reuben Kigame have filed a petition arguing that some provisions may restrict freedom of expression.

The High Court has suspended parts of the law pending the outcome of the case.

Some Members of Parliament have backed the President, saying the signing followed normal government procedure.