Raise impeachment bar to end pettiness and be just

The impeachment noose is loosely hanging around the neck of Meru Governor Kawira Mwangaza just over 100 days into office.

 According to media reports, the county government has been in a state of paralysis after members of the county assembly (MCAs) locked horns with the governor in what is playing out as a supremacy war between the two arms of government.
Section 2 of the County Government Act provides that an MCA may, by notice to the Speaker, supported by at least a third of all the members, move a motion for the removal of the governor under Article 181 of the Constitution.

The Act is silent on the nature of accusations admissible for impeachment, leaving it to the imagination of the accusers to cast their net and make sense of whatever is caught.
Among the grouses, the MCAs have against Ms Mwangaza are being a lone ranger, nepotism, incitement and the role of the first gentleman in official functions. But she claims they have been trying to arm-twist her with illegal or unrealistic demands.

Easy prey

The drama portrays a picture of supposedly easy prey that turned out too tough to catch, irritating the hunter to violence. It must be recalled that, despite running as an independent, Ms Mwangaza went against a strong political wave then sweeping across the region to trounce the incumbent, Kiraitu Murungi, and become the third Meru governor.

The MCAs must, therefore, have schemed to easily push through their demands, considering that she would be hanging precariously with no party to clutch on.

The Supreme Court’s ruling on the fate of impeached leaders should have been an eye-opener to the legislators on how to insulate the impeachment process against being misused as a tool for revenge and pettiness.

The law should clearly define grounds for initiating an impeachment in terms of the materiality and veracity of the violations.

It should also consider a national independent office where allegations from all assemblies are submitted for objective verification and determination of admissibility before proceeding for motion debate.

Weighty matters

That would ensure only weighty matters that cannot be solved administratively or through other alternative processes proceed to impeachment.
The matter can also be determined through a referendum, where county residents vote to either impeach the governor or dissolve the county government.

That would act as a deterrent for vengeful motion movers as the end-game will be a double sword that can slay the accuser or the accused.

The current legislation provides leeway to turn the impeachment process into a dangling carrot for the highest bidder or else the victim is condemned to a political death sentence.

It is unfortunate that duly elected governors are subjected to fear and untold threats when selfish demands by MCAs are not met.
Stop the drama, raise the impeachment bar.

Mr Mwinamo is a financial auditor. [email protected].