Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1589576,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589576/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 112,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Paul Nyamodi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "(b) the national executive and the executive structures in the county governments; and (c) the Judiciary and independent tribunals.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, the function of the removal of the Governor is delegated to the Senate of the Republic of Kenya by virtue of Article 1(3). The election of the Members of the National Assembly, Members of the Senate and any elected office is done directly by the people of Kenya. Mr. Speaker, Sir, as I have said, impeachment is the flipside of election and it is done again here by the people's representatives. I wish to emphasize this point. The Speaker gave a correct and appropriate direction at the beginning of these proceedings. That, voting on this Motion is by delegation. Voting on this Motion is not by all Members of the Senate, but by delegation. I submit that, that is in recognition of the special role or function that this House is being called upon to perform when you sit to consider the Motion for impeachment. It is not legislative, but it is delegated and the House has correctly interpreted that role as being exercisable only by delegations and not by all Members. Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is my submission that a correct interpretation of the doctrine of separation of powers is as follows and it has been held not just by this House, but also the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court; that, the role of the Judiciary in examining impeachment proceedings arises or kicks in once the impeachment proceeding is complete. Yes, the Judiciary has a role, but the Judiciary, as has been correctly held, does not have the ability to intervene at every stage. In our written submissions, we have referred you to the relevant decisions of the Court of Appeal in Kawira Mwangaza and the decision of the Supreme Court rendered earlier in the matter of Martin Nyaga Wambora. I wish to suggest a reasoning, perhaps, why the law is as it is. Impeachment proceedings and many proceedings under our Constitution are time-bound. Therefore, if judicial intervention is allowed in some of these time-bound proceedings as they proceed, it is not clear whether the Judiciary has the ability to suspend constitutional time, so as to allow the judicial proceedings to proceed, or whether it is better off to allow the impeachment proceeding to proceed and be completed, after which, a completed process review of the proceeding is taken to court. What am I saying? The correct interpretation of the doctrine of separation of powers, and it has been held repeatedly by this Senate and the courts, is that, even where an impeaching Assembly is making a mistake, allow it to complete the mistake. What is justiciable is the completed mistake. Do not interfere in between because of timelines. I submit that is a modern interpretation of the view of the doctrine of separation of powers as to how it applies to the power of county assemblies and this House to carry out their function of impeachment."
}