This archive report was first published on 18 August 2019.
Published on August 18, 2019, by Makau Mutua, SUNY Distinguished Professor at SUNY Buffalo Law School and Chair of KHRC.
Kenya's anti-graft mood is gaining momentum, with the courts playing a crucial role in holding corrupt public officials accountable. The recent suspension of Governor Ferdinand Waititu is a notable example of this trend.
Waititu, the Kiambu County boss, was barred from office while under indictment for corruption. The court's decision was a significant blow to his attempts to continue governing despite the indictment. The ruling was based on the Constitution, which anticipates the possibility of a vacancy in the governor's office and provides for the deputy governor to take over until the case is concluded.
Justice Mumbi Ngugi's opinion that county governors indicted for corruption and economic crimes must be barred from public office for the pendency of the case has set a precedent for the courts to follow. The ruling in Waititu's case echoes this opinion, with the court stating that it would be a mockery of justice to allow him access to the same office he's accused of abusing to line his own pockets and those of his family.
Prof Tom Ojienda and Nelson Havi, Waititu's lawyers, had argued that their client should be allowed to continue governing despite the indictment. However, the court rejected their appeal, ruling that Waititu's actions would undermine the integrity of the justice system.
The suspension of Waititu is a significant development in Kenya's fight against corruption. It demonstrates the courts' willingness to hold public officials accountable for their actions and to uphold the rule of law. As Makau Mutua notes, the anti-graft mood prevailing in Kenya should be clad in iron, with the courts playing a key role in ensuring that corrupt officials are held accountable.
