Kapseret MP Oscar Sudi recently took a firm stand in defense of President William Ruto’s donations to churches, responding to backlash from some quarters within the church community. During celebrations at the AIC Pioneer Church in Eldoret marking 50 years of existence, Sudi emphasized that Ruto’s contributions to the church were longstanding and had been a consistent practice throughout his political career.
Sudi, who has been a vocal supporter of Ruto, criticized what he termed as “strange reasons” given by certain church leaders for rejecting the President’s donations. He argued that Ruto’s financial and material support to churches should be viewed as a continuation of his service to the community, dating back to when he was a Member of Parliament. Sudi recalled that Ruto had been attending various churches and providing support, both financially and through kind gestures, underscoring that it was improper for some leaders to ignore these efforts now.
“This is all about God’s work,” Sudi stated. “No one has the right to threaten us or say they will not receive money from Ruto because of some strange reasons. We have even been threatened but the same God blessed Ruto to become President. It’s all God’s work.” The MP’s remarks were a direct response to the recent rejections from certain church leaders who questioned the President’s intentions and motives behind his donations.
Sudi’s comments came during a significant gathering attended by First Lady Rachel Ruto and other dignitaries, including Uasin Gishu Governor Jonathan Bii, nominated MP Joseph Wainaina, and Health PS Mary Muthoni. The event not only celebrated the church’s milestone but also provided an opportunity for Sudi to make his stance on the matter clear. He described the recent rejections as attempts by a few to tarnish the President’s image and influence the relationship between the government and the church.
Addressing concerns about the misuse of donations, Sudi argued that the President’s donations were consistent with a long-standing tradition of contributing to community development and charity. “For more than half my life, I have been attending church and donating cash,” he said. “There is no way I would be stopped from doing so. Having been raised in a Christian family and attended Sunday school, I strongly believe in the biblical principle of giving and contributing to the work of God.”
Sudi further criticized the social media activists who had been vocal in their criticism against the government’s initiatives and Ruto’s donations to churches. He described these critics as “useless people” who were more interested in stirring controversy than in constructive dialogue. According to Sudi, these individuals often misled the public, especially the youth, about the government’s intentions and programmes like the Social Health Insurance (SHA). The MP urged Kenyans to register for SHA, calling it an essential tool for accessing quality healthcare, particularly for those in marginalized communities.
The Kapseret legislator’s remarks highlight a broader trend in Kenyan politics where donations, especially from prominent figures like the President, often become points of contention. Critics argue that donations can sometimes be used as a means to buy influence, while supporters view them as acts of goodwill and community support. Sudi’s defense of Ruto underscores a deeper concern about maintaining the integrity of these contributions in the face of skepticism and rejection from parts of the church community.
In response to those rejecting Ruto’s donations, Sudi was unequivocal in his support of the President’s continued financial and material support to churches. He emphasized that giving was a personal choice and not one that should be influenced by external pressures or political considerations. “This is not about politics,” he said. “This is about God’s work, and no one should stand in the way of doing good.”
As Kenya continues to navigate complex political landscapes and questions of governance, the debate over donations from public officials like Ruto to religious institutions is likely to persist. Sudi’s comments reflect a broader tension between maintaining traditional values of giving and responding to contemporary challenges in governance and public perception. The issue also raises questions about the role of faith communities in influencing political processes and policy decisions in Kenya.
In conclusion, while some church leaders may choose to reject donations from President Ruto based on their own principles, Sudi’s defense highlights the ongoing need for dialogue and understanding between different sectors of society. The focus on service, giving, and the work of God, as framed by Sudi, suggests that these donations should be viewed in the broader context of community development and support rather than through the lens of political expedience.
