Kenya’s political debate has increasingly become a contest over who gets credit for the country’s successes and who takes responsibility for its failures.
In this environment, the opposition should avoid demonising every achievement associated with President William Ruto’s administration and instead focus on providing constructive scrutiny.
As a political analyst, I believe opposition parties have an important role in questioning government policies, exposing failures and demanding accountability.
However, effective opposition does not require rejecting everything associated with the government.
Where the administration has made genuine progress, such achievements should be acknowledged on their own merit.
Kenyan politics would benefit from a more issue-based conversation in which leaders ask whether a policy is working, whether it is benefiting ordinary citizens and whether public resources are being used responsibly.
Acknowledging government achievements, however, should not mean abandoning scrutiny. The Ruto administration must remain open to criticism over issues affecting Kenyans, including the cost of living, unemployment, taxation, public debt and access to essential services.
The real test should be results.
If a government programme improves service delivery, creates opportunities or strengthens an important sector, the opposition should be willing to acknowledge that achievement while proposing better alternatives where necessary.
Likewise, the government should not dismiss criticism simply because it comes from political opponents. Constructive criticism is an important part of democracy and can help identify weaknesses and improve public policy.
The bigger question is whether Kenya can move beyond politics where every government initiative is automatically celebrated by supporters and condemned by opponents.
That approach does not serve the interests of ordinary citizens.
As we approach the 2027 General Election, Kenyans deserve a political conversation centred on policies, ideas, evidence and measurable results.
The opposition should hold the government accountable, but accountability should be based on facts rather than blanket rejection. At the same time, the government should accept legitimate criticism and demonstrate through results why its policies deserve public support.
Political competition is healthy for democracy. But demonising every achievement simply because it comes from a political rival risks turning national development into a partisan contest.
Kenya needs an opposition that can say when the government is wrong, but also when it is right. It needs a government that can defend its record while remaining open to scrutiny.
Ultimately, it is the Kenyan voter who should judge the government’s performance.
Dr Charles Ng’ang’a is a JKUAT lecturer and political analyst.