Mumias East MP Peter Salasya has ignited a fresh political debate after publicly challenging former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua to account for his record on affirmative action for the people of North Eastern Kenya during his time in office.
In a pointed statement, Salasya questioned how many affirmative action programmes Gachagua actively pushed or rallied the government to implement for the historically marginalised region while serving as Deputy President and overseeing the Ministry of Special Programmes. He also raised concerns about how often Gachagua visited the region and whether his leadership translated into tangible development outcomes.
Salasya’s remarks came in response to Gachagua’s recent comments criticising leaders from Northern Kenya over persistent underdevelopment, despite years of devolution. Gachagua argued that counties in the region had received significant funds but had failed to establish strong public institutions, particularly schools, suggesting local leaders bore much of the blame.
The MP from Mumias East rejected this narrative, insisting that the challenges facing North Eastern Kenya require deliberate national intervention through affirmative action. He cited long-standing issues such as vast geographical sizes of constituencies, poor road networks, water scarcity, limited electricity access and insecurity, which he said cannot be resolved through devolution alone.
A review of public records and media reports shows no clearly documented affirmative action programmes specifically initiated or championed by Gachagua for North Eastern Kenya during his tenure as Deputy President. The controversy surrounding him has instead focused on his public statements questioning the continued need for affirmative action policies, particularly in education, arguing that devolution should have reduced disparities by now.
These remarks have drawn sharp criticism from leaders and residents of Northern Kenya, who view affirmative action in areas such as school placement and resource allocation as essential for addressing decades of marginalisation. Critics argue that questioning such policies without presenting evidence of alternative interventions risks deepening regional inequalities and undermining national cohesion.
The exchange between Salasya and Gachagua has therefore shifted the debate from rhetoric to accountability, with growing calls for national leaders to demonstrate concrete actions taken to uplift marginalised regions. As the political temperature rises, the controversy underscores a broader national conversation about leadership responsibility, equity and the unfinished business of inclusive development in Kenya.
