NAIROBI, Kenya July 10 – President William Ruto’s Wednesday’s directive urging police to “shoot protesters in the leg” if found looting or torching businesses have sparked outrage and raised serious constitutional and legal red flags.While the President said the order was meant to stop destruction without taking lives, legal experts and rights groups say such a directive violates both the Kenyan Constitution and international law. The bottom line: presidential directives cannot override the law, and President Ruto is not above it.“Anyone burning people’s businesses should be shot in the legs so that he can go to hospital and later face justice in court. They should not be killed,” Ruto said on Wednesday in Nairobi.His comments follow a deadly police crackdown during Saba Saba Day protests on July 7, in which over 30 Kenyans were reportedly killed, triggering condemnation from groups like the UN Human Rights Office, Human Rights Watch, and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR). – Ruto shoot order: What the law really says – According to Article 238 of the Kenyan Constitution and the National Police Service Act, police officers are only permitted to use force when it is absolutely necessary, proportionate to the threat, and employed as a last resort. The law strictly limits the use of firearms to situations where there is an immediate threat to life or serious injury. Acts such as looting or property destruction though criminal do not meet the threshold for the use of potentially lethal force, such as shooting someone in the leg.Importantly, the President has no legal authority to issue blanket shoot orders. Kenya is governed by the rule of law, and not by decree.Under the law, police officers who carry out illegal orders such as shooting unarmed looters can be held criminally liable. Meanwhile, the President could face legal and political consequences, including potential impeachment albeit a toll order, should his instructions result in unlawful killings. – What should be done instead? – The law is clear: police officers confronting looters are required to first attempt arrest and prosecution through proper legal channels and due process. They must prioritize the use of non-lethal methods, such as tear gas, rubber bullets, or water cannons, to manage the situation. The use of firearms is only permitted as a last resort, and only when officers are faced with an immediate, life-threatening danger.President Ruto’s comments appeared to be a softening of even harsher rhetoric from his Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen, who recently told officers to “shoot and kill” protesters.“Don’t spare them. What is the work of the guns issued to you? They are not toys” Murkomen said during a public address last week.That statement drew swift condemnation from civil society, the religious community, and international observers, who warned of growing authoritarianism and the normalization of state-sponsored brutality.Human rights watchdogs say the recent wave of protests has exposed a dangerous turn in the government’s response to dissent. According to KNCHR, over 30 protesters died during the Saba Saba protests, while others have previously faced arbitrary arrests, abductions, and forced disappearances.President Ruto’s frustration with the destruction of property is understandable, but his directive is not legal. Kenya’s Constitution demands restraint, due process, and accountability not vigilante justice from the state.Kenyans must now ask: Who will hold the state accountable when the law is ignored by the very leaders sworn to uphold it?