An affidavit by the Registrar of Political Parties, Ann Nderitu, could reshape the balance of power in Kenya’s National Assembly, potentially shifting the majority from the Kenya Kwanza Alliance to the Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition. The affidavit, presented to Justices Jairus Ngaah, Lawrence Mugambi, and John Chigiti, confirms that as of June 2023, only one party had legally exited the Azimio coalition.
Nderitu’s statement was in response to a petition by Kenneth Njagi and 12 others, who argue that the National Assembly’s leadership should reflect current party affiliations, positioning Azimio as the majority. This development also raises questions about National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula’s continued role, with accusations of bias due to his affiliation with the Kenya Kwanza Alliance.
Challenge to the Speaker’s Neutrality
Registrar Nderitu indicated that she had reached out to Ford Kenya regarding Wetang’ula’s status as the party leader while also serving as Speaker. Ford Kenya responded, through legal representatives Millimo, Muthomi & Company Advocates, asserting that no law prevents a Speaker from holding a political party office. However, Njagi’s lawyer, Kibe Mungai, argued that Wetang’ula’s dual role conflicts with his duty to remain impartial, especially on matters affecting majority and minority status.
Mungai stated, “It was beyond the Speaker’s authority to alter the electorate’s gazetted decision on party representation.”
Azimio’s Case for Majority Status
Azimio’s legal team maintains that Wetang’ula’s decision to recognize Kenya Kwanza as the majority was unconstitutional, given Azimio’s 171 members compared to Kenya Kwanza’s 165. Mungai further argued that Wetang’ula’s active role in Kenya Kwanza undermines his impartiality, contrasting him with former Speaker Justin Muturi, who refrained from holding any party office while in office. “This goes against the principles of multipartism and parliamentary independence,” said Mungai.
Speaker’s Response and Call for Dismissal
Speaker Wetang’ula responded that he had been wrongly named in the case, suggesting it should be heard by the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) instead. His counsel, Judy Guserwa, argued that Wetang’ula cannot be personally sued for parliamentary actions and asserted that unrelated issues, such as the Finance Act 2023, complicate the petition and justify its dismissal.
Azimio’s Support for Judicial Oversight
Azimio’s legal counsel, Arnold Oginga, countered that Parliament and the Speaker are under the courts’ jurisdiction. “This case belongs here due to its polycentric nature, touching on parliamentary, electoral, and constitutional issues,” argued Oginga, insisting that PPDT lacks authority over the Speaker.
Court’s Anticipated Ruling
This case highlights crucial questions surrounding Kenya’s party alignment and parliamentary governance. The court’s verdict, expected in February next year, could have significant implications for the National Assembly’s leadership and the Speaker’s role in shaping its political direction.
About the Author
