The impeachment motion against Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko will proceed today after a Nairobi court declined to stop the Senate from holding the debate.
Through lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui, Sonko had pleaded with Justice Nduma Nderi to restrain the Senate from subjecting him to trial over allegations of misconduct. The judge, however, declined the request and said he will issue a substantive ruling on the matter later in the afternoon.
The proceedings will start at 9.30am while the judge’s decision will be delivered at 3pm. This means the matter will have been overtaken by events since the governor will have appeared before the Senate to answer to the charges levelled against him by the county assembly.
Mr Kinyanjui told the court that Sonko will be prejudiced if the Senate proceeds with the motion. “They were aware of a court order stopping the county Assembly from debating the impeachment motion. The orders are still in force and have not been vacated. No person and entity should be allowed to take the law into their hands and do what they want.”
He argued that the governor will not face a fair trial because he was never given the evidence that MCAs relied on to impeach him on December 3.
But lawyers for the county Assembly, Milimo Muthomi and Duncan Okatch, said the motion to impeach Sonko is properly before the Senate, and that the court should not interfere with a legal process provided for in the Constitution.
The lawyers said the Employment and Labour Relations Court where Sonko filed his suit has no jurisdiction to determine a dispute that does not involve an employer and employee.
“It is not in public interest for the court to gag the Senate. The governor should not be allowed to use the court to evade answering questions of accountability since he will have his day with senators to prove his innocence,” said Milimo. Kinyanjui had argued that the motion was similar and raised same grounds as the one tabled by Minority Whip Peter Imwatok on February 20, but which was stopped by the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
“The assembly has at all times been aware of the existing court orders and have never attempted to have them discharged. They proceeded with another impeachment motion raising similar allegations when the case was still active in court,” said Kinyanjui.
Sonko, in his affidavit, swore that that the assembly had no power to remove him from office using unorthodox means.
