Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 483931,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/483931/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 32,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "of the public who expressed great interest in the proceedings sitting through the hearings as they keenly followed the proceedings of the matter. Mr. Speaker, Sir, before I address myself to the findings of the Committee, allow me to raise some of the issues that the Committee considered. The first issue was the jurisdiction of the Senate over the impeachment of a deputy governor. The Deputy Governor through his lawyer submitted that a deputy governor would not be removed from office because there was no provision in the Constitution for the removal of a deputy governor. Counsel further submitted that if a governor and a deputy governor were removed from office, the national Government would take over the operations of the county which would be contrary to the spirit of devolution. However, the Special Committee disagreed with that argument. Article 182(4) of the Constitution provides that the Speaker of the County Assembly shall act as county governor were a vacancy to occur in the office of both the county governor and the deputy. The Committee’s position was fortified by the findings of the High Court of Kenya in two cases where it held that a deputy governor is impeachable using the same procedure as that provided for a governor. These courts are; the High Court in Kerugoya, Constitutional Petition No.5 of 2014, hon. Dorothy N. Mucungu versus the Speaker, County Assembly of Embu and others; the High Court in Machakos, application No.113 of 2014, hon. Bernard Muhia from Kiala Versus the Speaker of the County Assembly of Machakos and four others. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the second issue was on the proceedings before the County Assembly of Machakos. The Deputy Governor, in his response to the invitation to appear, submitted that the impeachment process before the County Assembly of Machakos was so systematically rushed and stage-managed and that the same did not amount to a fair hearing. He further submitted that the constitutional principles of rule of law, participation of the people and respect for human rights and dignity were breached during the impeachment hearings. The Deputy Governor of Machakos County further complained that the County Assembly of Machakos did not follow its own Standing Orders while impeaching him. With respect to this issue, Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Committee agreed with the findings of the Special Committee in the impeachment proceedings of the Governor of Kericho County, where the Committee noted that a legislature makes its own rules of procedure and can choose to override the same rules of procedure if the circumstances warrant the same, only a legislator can judge the conformity of its actions with its own rules of procedure. Consequently, the Special Committee would not go behind the resolution of the county assembly to establish the procedural propriety of the county assembly. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the third matter concerned the threshold for impeachment. The Committee considered the following question: What is the threshold or standard of proof required for a deputy governor to be removed from office? Allow me to cite jurisprudence that emanated from the Senate. During the Senate’s consideration of the Report of the Special Committee investigating the removal of the Governor of Kericho on 3rd June, 2014, the Senate adopted the Committee’s recommendations that the threshold for impeachment should take into account the following considerations:- (i) the allegations must be serious, substantial and weighty; The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}