High Court judges deliver blow to Kenya Kwanza leadership in National Assembly

In a landmark ruling on Friday, three High Court judges overturned the Kenya Kwanza Coalition’s grip on the National Assembly leadership, leaving Speaker Moses Wetang’ula, Kikuyu MP Kimani Ichung’wa, and South Mugirango MP Sylvanus Osoro in a precarious position. Justices Jairus Ngaah, John Chigiti, and Lawrence Mugambi declared Ichung’wa and Osoro unfit to hold their positions as Majority Leader and Majority Whip, respectively, effectively rendering them jobless.

The court also placed Speaker Wetang’ula in a tight spot by ruling that he cannot simultaneously serve as the leader of the Ford Kenya party and the Speaker of the National Assembly. The decision came in response to a case filed by lawyer Kenneth Njagi, Suyianka Lempaa, and 11 others, challenging the legitimacy of Kenya Kwanza’s majority claim in the House.

The judges found that Wetang’ula and Ichung’wa failed to provide evidence supporting their claim that 14 MPs had defected from the Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition Party to join Kenya Kwanza. The court emphasized that no post-election coalition agreement was presented to substantiate the alleged defections.

“The Speaker, in his official and private capacity, swore an affidavit opposing the case but failed to provide any evidence of a post-election coalition agreement. Similarly, Kimani Ichung’wa did not produce any such agreement,” the judges stated.

The ruling reaffirmed that Azimio la Umoja remains the majority coalition in the National Assembly, as determined by the August 9, 2022, general election. The judges noted that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) had gazetted Azimio as the majority party, with 171 seats compared to Kenya Kwanza’s 165. They declared Wetang’ula’s decision to alter the majority matrix in favor of Kenya Kwanza as unconstitutional and illegal.

The court also highlighted that Wetang’ula had sought coalition agreements from the Registrar of Political Parties, Ann Nderitu, during a stalemate between Azimio and Kenya Kwanza. However, Nderitu’s submission of the documents was dismissed by Wetang’ula, who claimed they were not certified. The judges found this dismissal unjustified, further undermining Kenya Kwanza’s position.

In her affidavit, Nderitu clarified that only one party, the Devolution Empowerment Party, had legally exited the Azimio coalition. She also raised concerns about Wetang’ula’s dual role as Speaker and Ford Kenya party leader, stating that public officers should not hold political party positions. Despite Ford Kenya’s legal team arguing that no law prohibits the Speaker from holding such a role, the court found Wetang’ula’s position untenable.

Lawyers for the petitioners, including Mungai and Ndegwa Njiru, argued that Wetang’ula’s actions were biased and unconstitutional. They contended that the Speaker had no authority to determine the majority party, as this was already established by the IEBC and the Registrar of Political Parties. They also criticized Wetang’ula for presiding over a matter in which he had a vested interest, violating the principle of impartiality.

“The Speaker’s decision to declare Kenya Kwanza as the majority was a clear overreach of his powers. The majority and minority positions were sealed during the election, and no post-election agreement could alter that,” argued Mungai.

Njiru added that Wetang’ula’s active involvement in Kenya Kwanza politics compromised his neutrality, making him unfit to serve as Speaker. He compared Wetang’ula to his predecessor, Justin Muturi, who maintained a non-partisan stance during his tenure.

Wetang’ula, however, defended himself, arguing that the case should have been filed before the Political Parties Dispute Tribunal (PPDT) rather than the High Court. He also claimed that the petitioners had erroneously included him in the case, as it primarily involved political parties.

Azimio la Umoja and Jubilee Party supported the petitioners, with their lawyers asserting that the High Court was the appropriate forum to address the matter. They accused Wetang’ula and Kenya Kwanza of selectively interpreting the law to maintain their grip on power.

The ruling has significant implications for Kenya’s political landscape, reaffirming the importance of adhering to constitutional principles and the rule of law. It also underscores the need for impartiality in parliamentary leadership, particularly in a highly polarized political environment.

As the dust settles, the Kenya Kwanza Coalition faces an uphill battle to regain its footing in the National Assembly, while Azimio la Umoja celebrates a major victory in its quest to uphold democratic integrity.