Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 693249,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/693249/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 128,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Peter Wanyama",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, for the record, my name is Peter Wanyama, the Legal Counsel for the Governor. It is important that we lay this basis because if you look at these charges, you will get the feeling that the County Assembly has not done what is expected of it. This is because impeachment is a political process that must meet the legal and constitutional threshold. The process of removal of a Governor is a process that is laid in Article 181 of the Constitution. If you read the provisions of Article 181 of the Constitution, you will see that there are certain fundamental criteria, safeguards and guidelines which the Constitution requires must be met before any impeachment is accepted. One of the most important safeguards which is constitutionally provided is gross violation. The law on impeachment has now been settled. We are not grappling in the dark. We have a definition of the words “gross violation”, “gross misconduct,” and “abuse of office.” The law, as it is, is that whenever a charge is indicated that it is “gross”, first of all, it must specifically state the word “gross.” Secondly, the charge in question must specify the section of the Constitution that has been violated. For example, if you look at charge No.1, you will see it has a major and incurable defect. First, there is no provision of law which has been cited as having been violated. Secondly, there is no provision of the Constitution which has been cited as having been violated. If you look at charge No. 2, they have charged the Governor with a charge known as “failure to comply with the law”. Is that a charge which is available under the provisions of Article 181 of the Constitution? Is there an express charge under Article 181 of the Constitution, known as “failure to comply with the law?” yet, it exists in the charge instrument. It is our submission by way of introduction that the charges as drafted, have not at all met the threshold laid down by reading of Article 181 of the Constitution. Secondly, the evidence which has been submitted by the County Assembly, there is no evidence at all which links the Governor to these allegations. Yes, it can be said that the Governor is the Chief Executive Officer of the county. However, in terms of accountability, the Governor is accountable at a policy decision level; for everything at the county level. But what is the law governing impeachment? The law governing impeachment as laid down by my colleague from the County Assembly has been settled. This is the law. There must be nexus between the Governor and those allegations. For instance, if the Governor wrote a letter or directed either verbally or by way of any other direction for something illegal to be done, then that is a test which will meet the threshold. If you look at the charges as drafted, it says that as Chief Executive Officer of the County, you are responsible or accountable for this. In accordance with this documentation and the evidence admitted, we are saying that there must be nexus. What it is the Governor did, in terms of wrong doing, to warrant culpability? 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."
}