How court decision paved way for Sonko ouster motion
Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko when he appeared before Senior Principal Magistrate Peter Ooko at the Milimani Law Courts on September 17, 2020.
What you need to know:
- A court on Thursday declined to extend orders stopping Sonko impeachment motion.
- The orders were to remain in force until the hearing of the case.
A Labour court judge on Thursday declined to extend orders barring the Nairobi County Assembly from discussing the motion to impeach embattled Governor Mike Sonko.
Justice James Rika declined to extend the interim orders which had earlier been granted to Sonko restraining the county assembly from proceeding with the impeachment motion.
Mr Sonko was represented by lawyer Harrisson Kinyanjui who had obtained orders barring the Nairobi county assembly (NCA) from discussing Sonko's removal.
The orders were to remain in force until the hearing of the case on Thursday (today).
The court's decision paved way for the County Assembly's deliberations on the matter and subsequent passage of the impeachment motion by Nairobi MCAs.
During the Thursday afternoon debate, 88 ward representatives voted in support of a censure motion against Sonko, surpassing the two-thirds threshold of 82 votes.
The censure motion was moved by Nairobi County Assembly Minority Leader Michael Ogada.
Impeachment motion
Besides declining to extend the orders restraining Sonko’s impeachment motion, Justice Rika recused himself from the case then referred the case to the presiding Judge, Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC), Lady Justice Maureen Onyango for fresh directions.
In the case, Sonko had named the Nairobi County Assembly and Mr Ogada as the defendants.
The governor was seeking orders to stop the deliberation of his impeachment motion on the grounds that it was infringing on his constitutional rights and that the move was ill-advised as it sought to deny city residents from being served by the governor of their choice.
The orders given by the court earlier stopping the impeachment were to lapse on December 3, 2020.
The County Assembly and Mr Ogada were represented by Duncan Okatchi.
In his court papers, Mr Okatchi stated the court lacks jurisdiction to bar the county assembly from carrying out its constitutional mandate of discussing matters geared towards improving the livelihood of city residents.
