Former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju has sparked fresh controversy after declaring that he wants to be buried within 48 hours if he dies while in state custody, a statement that has intensified the already heated legal and political environment surrounding his case.
Speaking during a press briefing, Tuju said he has already communicated his final wishes to his family, making it clear that he does not want any involvement from the state in his funeral arrangements under any circumstances.
His remarks come at a time when he is facing legal scrutiny, following claims related to his alleged disappearance and subsequent interactions with law enforcement agencies.
Also Read: Tuju Fights Back: Former Minister Rejects DCI “Hoax” Findings in Disappearance Saga
In a striking and emotionally charged tone, Tuju stated that he is mentally prepared for any outcome, including what he described as the possibility of mistreatment while in custody.
He emphasized that death is inevitable and framed his request for a 48-hour burial as a personal decision rooted in dignity and control over his final rites.
Referencing past high-profile deaths, Tuju cited examples of prominent figures who were buried within short timeframes, arguing that swift burial is both practical and culturally acceptable.
However, his mention of political figures in this context has raised eyebrows, with some observers questioning the intent and tone of the comparison.
Beyond his burial wishes, Tuju also made serious allegations against authorities, claiming that he was assaulted after presenting himself to the police.
He dismissed earlier claims that he had gone into hiding to evade arrest, instead asserting that he voluntarily reported to a police station before being detained and mistreated.
According to Tuju, narratives suggesting he had been hiding are false and part of an attempt to misrepresent the events surrounding his case.
He maintained that his actions were driven by safety concerns, stating that he had initially retreated to Kiambu after noticing suspicious individuals allegedly trailing him.
The unfolding situation is closely tied to an ongoing dispute involving his reported abduction and subsequent arrest, where authorities have accused him of providing false information.
Tuju has firmly denied these allegations, insisting that his account is truthful and that he is being unfairly targeted.
His latest statements are likely to deepen public debate, with supporters viewing them as a bold stand against perceived state overreach, while critics may interpret them as politically charged or dramatic.
The case has also reignited broader concerns about the treatment of high-profile individuals in custody, the credibility of law enforcement narratives, and the role of political influence in legal proceedings.
As investigations and court processes continue, Tuju’s remarks add a new layer of complexity, shifting attention not only to the legal issues at hand but also to questions of personal safety, rights, and state accountability.
For now, the situation remains fluid, with both legal and political implications expected to unfold in the coming days as more details emerge.
