Nyamira Governor Amos Nyaribo has secured a dramatic lifeline.
Thus, surviving a Senate impeachment trial after the proceedings were terminated on a crucial legal technicality.
The ruling hinged on the Nyamira County Assembly’s failure to meet the constitutional threshold for the two-thirds majority.
Also, it spares the governor from immediate removal and underscores the importance of procedural precision in high-stakes political processes in Kenya.
The decision, delivered by the Senate, brings an abrupt end to a tumultuous impeachment motion initiated by the Nyamira County Assembly (MCA).
Nyaribo now joins a small list of Kenyan governors whose political fate was decided not by the substance of the charges against them, which included gross violation of the Constitution and abuse of office, but by the letter of the law.
The Legal Argument
The central issue that determined Governor Nyaribo’s fate revolved around the two-thirds constitutional threshold required to pass an impeachment motion in a County Assembly.
The Nyamira County Assembly, comprising 35 members, needed a minimum of 24 votes to achieve the two-thirds majority required under Article 181 of the Constitution and Section 33 of the County Governments Act.
However, the County Assembly reported that only 23 MCAs voted in favor of the motion.
Governor Nyaribo’s legal team, led by counsel Elias Mutuma, raised a preliminary objection.
Arguing that since the required 24 votes were not secured, the resolution passed by the County Assembly was fundamentally invalid and incompetent.
The Proxy Voting Controversy
The legal debate was further complicated by the Assembly’s attempt to account for the votes.
The governor’s lawyers vehemently challenged the use of “proxy voting,” where some absent MCAs allegedly delegated their votes.
They argued this practice was “alien, illegal, and null and void” and was used fraudulently to mask a numerical impossibility.
The defense claimed that only 19 members were physically present during the vote, making the 23-vote tally suspect.
The Senate Speaker, Amason Kingi, ultimately sided with the governor’s legal team.
Therefore, agreeing that the preliminary objection concerning the constitutional numbers met the necessary legal threshold.
Following a Senate vote (38 “Ayes” to 4 “Nays”) to uphold the objection, the impeachment hearing was officially terminated.
Setting a New Precedent for Procedural Diligence
The Senate’s decision sends a clear message to county assemblies across Kenya: procedural correctness is paramount.
Also, the ruling emphasizes that the political will to remove a governor is secondary to strict adherence to the constitutional process.
For Nyamira County, the governor’s survival means a return to the political status quo, though the deep-seated political tensions with the County Assembly are unlikely to subside.
But Nyaribo now faces the challenge of uniting the county and delivering on his mandate, having survived what was reportedly his third impeachment attempt since taking office.
This case adds another vital layer to Kenya’s devolution jurisprudence.
Indeed, establishing a firm precedent that MCAs must meticulously calculate and achieve the two-thirds threshold on the floor of the House.
Without relying on legally contentious methods like proxy voting, any impeachment effort would need to succeed at the Senate level.
ALSO READ: Chinese Smart Glasses Go Global: AI Tech Firms Challenge Meta, Eyeing Market Dominance
