National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula has moved quickly to shut down claims that he receives orders to influence Parliament.
In a firm TV interview, he rejected reports that President William Ruto or any other power broker directs how he runs the House. Wetang’ula framed the claims as political noise pushed by losers of parliamentary votes.
His denial comes at a tense moment, as critics accuse Parliament of rubber-stamping executive-backed laws. The fight over alleged orders to influence Parliament now sits at the center of Kenya’s power debate.
Wetang’ula Denies Orders to Influence Parliament and Defends the Speaker’s Office
Wetang’ula used a TV47 interview on Wednesday night to draw a clear line. He said no one has ever instructed him on how to preside over Parliament. He rejected the idea that he shapes debate or outcomes. He stressed that the Speaker enforces rules and protects procedure, not policy.
He dismissed the allegations as baseless. He said they surface after heated votes, when losing sides look for excuses. He insisted that even the president has never called him to sway proceedings. He went further. He said he would reject such a call if it ever came.
Wetang’ula leaned on the Constitution and standing orders. He said the Speaker does not initiate debate. He said the Speaker does not push motions. He said the Speaker does not vote, except in rare tie-breaking situations defined by law. He framed his role as neutral and procedural.
The Speaker also invoked history. He argued that Kenya’s Parliament has guarded its independence across different administrations. He said the House has survived deep divisions without surrendering its autonomy. He claimed that tradition still stands.
Yet the timing of his remarks matters. Parliament has faced sharp criticism over recent laws touching health, infrastructure, and the economy. Civil society groups and opposition leaders argue that MPs have rushed Executive-backed bills. They say debate has thinned. They say scrutiny has weakened. Those claims fuel talk of orders to influence Parliament, even without direct proof.
Wetang’ula countered that narrative. He said the House has scrutinized bills and exercised oversight. He said MPs debate freely and vote according to their positions. He urged critics to respect outcomes of democratic votes.
Critics Say Rubber-Stamp Claims Keep Orders to Influence Parliament Alive
Critics remain unconvinced. They point to patterns, not phone calls. They argue that speed, party discipline, and voting blocs create pressure that looks like control. They say influence does not need explicit orders. They say power works through incentives and alliances.
Opposition MPs cite fast-tracked legislation. They question limited amendments on controversial clauses. They accuse leadership of managing the floor to favour government positions. They argue that procedure can shape outcomes as much as votes.
Analysts also highlight the Speaker’s soft power. They note that rulings on points of order, admissibility, and time allocation matter. They say those tools can tilt debate without breaking rules. That perception, they argue, sustains talk of orders to influence Parliament.
Wetang’ula rejected that framing. He said rules guide every ruling. He said written law, not politics, shapes decisions from the Chair. He said transparency protects the House. He urged critics to challenge rulings through formal channels.
The debate now splits along trust lines. Supporters see a Speaker defending institutional integrity. Detractors see denial without reform. The gap keeps the controversy alive.
Speaker Warns MPs Over Executive Summons and Oversight Pressure
Days before the interview, Wetang’ula raised a different concern. He warned MPs about over-summoning Executive officials. He spoke during the 2026 Legislative Retreat in Nakuru. He said committees have called the same officials repeatedly on the same issues.
He said Cabinet Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, and senior officers have complained. He named the Inspector General of Police, Douglas Kanja, and TSC Acting CEO Eveleen Mitei as frequent targets. He said some officials face three or more committee summons on identical matters.
Wetang’ula acknowledged Parliament’s oversight duty. He said oversight remains constitutional and vital. But he warned against excess. He said repeated summons create pressure and paralyze administration. He said they risk turning oversight into harassment.
This warning complicates the narrative. On one hand, critics accuse Parliament of yielding to the Executive. On the other, the Speaker says MPs overreach and squeeze officials. Wetang’ula framed balance as the goal. He said Parliament must check power without crippling governance.
He also linked procedure to credibility. He said disciplined oversight strengthens public trust. He said disorder feeds claims of manipulation. He implied that clear rules, applied evenly, undercut talk of orders to influence Parliament.
The political stakes remain high. As Kenya heads into another intense legislative cycle, every ruling will face scrutiny. Wetang’ula has staked his defense on law and tradition. Whether that settles doubts will depend on how Parliament handles the next set of contentious bills.
