When Susan Chepng'etich Kihika, Deputy Governor of Nakuru County, was alleged to have slapped Deputy President William Ruto’s personal assistant, the claim spread like wildfire across Facebook, X and WhatsApp.
The clip, posted on January 21, 2025 with the caption “ODM Deputy Governor tries to slap DP Ruto’s aide during heated meeting,” actually shows a 27‑second excerpt from a parliamentary session held on October 18, 2022 in Nairobi. The footage features Farouk Kibet, who has been Deputy President Ruto’s Personal Assistant since 2013, and a different senator altogether.
Background of the viral claim
Earlier that week, a slew of edited videos began circulating, each purporting to show Kihika in a physical confrontation with Kibet. The narrative quickly morphed into a story about Kihika being “kicked out of the DP’s official Karen residence” after the alleged slap. Social media users jumped on the story, citing the clip as proof of an escalating feud within the ruling United Democratic Alliance (UDA).
But the claim ignored a crucial detail: the recording predates the alleged incident by almost three years. It captures a heated exchange between Senator Kihika and Cabinet Secretary Mwangi Githahu on agricultural policy, not a personal dispute.
How Africa Check untangled the falsehood
The investigation was led by Catherine Mwangi, lead verifier for Africa Check’s Nairobi digital verification team. Her group ran reverse‑image searches, pulled the video’s metadata, and cross‑referenced the parliament’s official agenda for October 18, 2022.
“The background seating arrangement, the blue‑green upholstery, even the presence of Senator James Orengo on the right‑hand side, all match the archived parliamentary footage,” Mwangi wrote in the fact‑check published on January 25, 2025.
To further validate the source, Africa Check consulted the Kenya Parliament’s records, which listed Kihika as the questioning senator on that day and confirmed that Kibet was present as a parliamentary aide, not as a personal assistant to the Deputy President.
Meanwhile, Kihika herself told TV47 in an interview on January 23, 2025, “That’s propaganda by my opponents who want to drive a wedge between us. Farouk was even the best man at my wedding, so he is a family friend.” Kibet echoed the sentiment, noting they have known each other for more than 15 years through Eldoret North political circles.
Political context and why the story matters
Kenya is gearing up for the August 2027 general elections. The Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), led by Raila Odinga, is the official opposition to President William Ruto’s United Democratic Alliance (UDA). In such a charged atmosphere, any hint of discord within the ruling camp can be weaponised.
Historically, Ruto’s office has been a frequent target of sensational allegations. A widely reported 2002 claim that former Assistant Minister Reuben Chesire was slapped by Ruto at State House remains unproven, yet it still resurfaces in partisan debates. Former Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka even claimed in December 2024 that he was “there” during the alleged incident, though police records show no formal complaint was ever pursued.
Since January 2024, Africa Check has debunked 17 misinformation campaigns aimed at Kenyan politicians. Twelve of those involved fictitious physical altercations, suggesting a pattern: opponents often manufacture drama to erode public confidence.
Impact of the debunked video
For Kihika, the false narrative threatened to tarnish a career that includes serving as Nakuru County Governor from 2017‑2022 and representing the county in the Senate since 2022. A smear of this nature could have jeopardised her re‑election bid and strained the delicate coalition between ODM and other regional parties.
For the wider public, the episode underscores how quickly altered footage can shape perceptions. Social media platforms reported more than 150,000 views of the clip within 48 hours, with engagement spikes coinciding with the release of the fact‑check.
International observers note that Kenya’s media landscape is increasingly vulnerable to deep‑fake style edits, especially ahead of elections. The government has pledged to work with tech companies on faster takedown mechanisms, but critics argue the response remains reactive rather than proactive.
What comes next?
Africa Check plans to monitor further claims about Ruto’s allies, citing a “watchlist” of 12 pending videos flagged by users. The organization also intends to launch a digital literacy campaign in partnership with Kenyan universities to teach students how to verify video sources.
Meanwhile, Kihika’s office has filed a formal request with the Communications Authority of Kenya to trace the origin of the edited clips, hoping to hold the perpetrators accountable.
Key facts
- Original footage recorded on October 18, 2022 during a parliamentary session in Nairobi.
- False claim spread on January 21, 2025 across Facebook, X and WhatsApp.
- Africa Check’s verification released on January 25, 2025.
- 17 misinformation campaigns debunked since Jan 2024; 12 involved fabricated physical fights.
- Kihika and Kibet have known each other for over 15 years and share personal ties.
Frequently Asked Questions
How did the video get misidentified as a 2025 incident?
The clip was stripped of its original timestamp and overlaid with a misleading caption. Without the original metadata, many users assumed it was recent, especially because the faces of Kihika and Kibet are recognizable.
What legal recourse does Kihika have against the spread of the fake video?
She has asked the Communications Authority of Kenya to trace the source of the edited footage and is considering a defamation suit. Kenyan law allows victims of reputational harm to seek damages if the publisher acted with negligence or malice.
Why are physical‑altercation claims so common in Kenyan political misinformation?
Physical violence resonates with voters as a sign of deep division. Crafting a story about a slap or punch creates an instant drama that overshadows policy debate, making it a favoured tactic for partisan actors.
What steps are platforms taking to curb similar misinformation?
X and Facebook have announced faster content‑review pipelines for political material in Kenya, while WhatsApp’s end‑to‑end encryption makes third‑party verification harder. Experts suggest that community‑driven reporting and AI‑based detection are the most viable short‑term solutions.
Will this fact‑check affect the upcoming 2027 elections?
It may temper the immediate fallout for Kihika, but the broader pattern of fake‑video attacks is likely to persist. Voters’ trust in political narratives could remain fragile unless systemic media‑literacy measures are implemented.
Ellen Ross
October 15, 2025 AT 01:41The viral impulse that transforms a mundane parliamentary exchange into a theatrical showdown says more about our collective imagination than about the participants themselves.
When we are presented with a neatly edited clip, our brains leap to narrative shortcuts, stitching together context that never existed.
In the case of the alleged slap, the footage was harvested from a 2022 session, yet the caption thrust it into a 2025 drama.
This temporal dislocation is a classic tactic: it creates urgency, prompting shares before fact‑checkers can intervene.
Moreover, the choice of a physical confrontation taps into primal anxieties about power and disrespect.
A slap, imagined or real, becomes a symbol of hierarchy being challenged, which is intoxicating for partisan audiences.
The manipulation is not merely technical; it is cultural, exploiting a society where visual proof is often taken at face value.
By stripping metadata and overlaying a sensational headline, the perpetrators weaponize trust in video as the new gospel.
Meanwhile, the real figures-Senator Kihika and aide Farouk Kibet-are reduced to caricatures bound by this false story.
Their personal histories, such as a fifteen‑year friendship, are drowned out by the echo chamber of outrage.
Fact‑checkers like Africa Check perform a crucial service by re‑anchoring the clip in its proper time and place.
They cross‑reference agenda logs, seating charts, and even the presence of fellow senators to reconstruct the scene.
Such diligence underscores that verification is possible, even in an era of deep‑fake‑like edits.
However, the speed of misinformation often outpaces the corrective mechanisms, leaving reputations bruised in the interim.
The lesson for the public is to adopt a skeptical posture, interrogating sources before amplifying any video.
Only by demanding provenance can we hope to restore a discourse that values truth over theatrics.