Reprieve for Sonko as court suspends debate on impeachment

Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko

Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko at the Milimani Anti-Corruption Court on September 14, 2020.

Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group

The planned motion to impeach Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko could run into headwinds following the High Court’s suspension of debate by MCAs.

Employment and Labour Relations Court Judge Nzioki Makau on Tuesday issued conservatory orders staying the debate, which was to take place on Thursday.

The judge said the respondents in the petition, including Nairobi Speaker Benson Mutura and Clerk Edward Gichana, should be served immediately.

The development came after the governor, through lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui, went to court on Monday, under a certificate of urgency, seeking to stop the new impeachment motion by Minority Leader Michael Ogada.

Contempt claim

Mr Kinyanjui sought to stop the censure motion until a petition he filed in February is determined.

Last week, Mr Kinyanjui accused Speaker Mutura of contempt of court, saying he admitted a fresh impeachment motion against his client yet the proceedings of the February petition, against a similar motion by Minority Whip Peter Imwatok, were pending.

Mr Kinyanjui also noted that on October 23, Justice Byram Onganya dismissed a preliminary objection to the petition, No 35 of 2020, paving the way for determination.

“The petition is pending determination and constitutes a live proceeding within Nairobi County Assembly Standing Order 49(3)(c) … and you are fully aware that the matter is scheduled before the court on December 3. Indisputably, these are live proceedings,” he said.

Other arguments

However, Mr Mutura says the motion by Mr Imwatok stands withdrawn, in line with Standing Order 49(3).

“Now that Imwatok failed to meet the timelines prescribed, I hereby clarify that the motion by the member, on the removal of the governor from office, stands withdrawn,” he said.

Mr Kinyanjui disagreed, saying only Mr Imwatok can withdraw his motion, according to Standing Order 55(2), which stipulates that only the member who tabled the notice can withdraw it.

“Standing Order 55(2) dictates that a special motion can be withdrawn except with leave of the assembly. You, therefore, have no unilateral power to withdraw the motion dated February 20,” he said.