Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 970873,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/970873/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 55,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Njoroge Nani Mungai",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "– the Court of Appeal had occasion to consider the question of the removal of a governor, and it stated that the removal of a governor is not about criminality or culpability but it is about accountability, political governance as well as policy and political responsibility. The evidence that you will hear in the course of today will demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt, that Gov. Waititu has failed on the account of accountability, political governance and political responsibility, and has done so in a manner that warrants his removal. The court then went on to ask the question of the threshold that is required to be demonstrated under Article 181 before a governor can be removed. The court held that there must be a nexus between the Governor’s conduct and the alleged gross violations. It is, therefore, not enough for us to demonstrate that there were violations; we must be able to demonstrate that those violations are directly linked to the conduct of the Governor. In the course of today, this House will hear evidence of the Governor’s direct involvement in acts of breach of the Constitution, breach of the law, as well as criminal conduct that has been investigated and established by a Constitutional Commission. It will be our submission at the end that there is sufficient nexus between the Governor’s conduct and the alleged gross misconduct. At the end, when the Senate retires to deliberate, what you must ask is; do the facts and evidence support the impeachable charges? It is our humble submission that when you look at that evidence, you will find that that will have been established. A couple of points in terms of the evidence; the County Assembly provided the evidence that was used in the impeachment, and the Speaker has alluded to that. The Notice of Motion contains the evidence and we have also filed additional evidence and witness statements. What is not in dispute is that at no time has Governor Waititu disputed a single fact that has been presented; not at the County Assembly, and not before you. Therefore, any allegations or facts that have been presented have been met by only one document, which is his notice of preliminary objection. Therefore, the question that you will have to ask is; in the absence of evidence from the Governor and in light of the compelling evidence that you will have received from the County Assembly, do you have sufficient evidence to impeach the Governor? I do not wish to get into the details of evidence at this point, but it is important to sign-post to the Senate so that when we come to present the evidence, you are able to follow what it is that we are trying to do with the evidence. There are three broad charges that are brought against the Governor; the first is the violation of the Constitution and the various stated statutes. The evidence that you will see with regards to violation of the Constitution and the stated statues – the County Governments Act and the Public Finance Act – will lead to one irresistible inference. That is; that there was a concerted and consistent effort by the Governor to subvert the checks, balances and controls that have been put in place to safeguard public finances. You will, for example, see that when it comes to the budgeting process, the law and the The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}