Kericho Governor Erick Mutai, cornered by corruption allegations and facing a second impeachment bid, has resorted to an unprecedented move—urging President William Ruto to dissolve the entire county government.
The embattled first-term governor, elected with high hopes in 2022, now blames everyone but himself as his administration sinks into scandal and sabotage.
But behind the calls for fresh elections lies a more troubling reality: a failed leadership model marked by gross mismanagement, underhand deals, and a desperate attempt to avoid accountability. Is this leadership or cowardice dressed as populism?
Governor Erick Mutai Faces Mounting Pressure Over Corruption and Mismanagement
Governor Erick Mutai’s dramatic appeal to President Ruto to dissolve the Kericho County government comes at a time when his administration is on the verge of collapse. For the second time in less than two years, a motion to impeach the governor has been tabled at the County Assembly. While Mutai publicly frames the chaos as internal sabotage by elected leaders and civil servants, a closer look reveals a deeply entrenched pattern of misgovernance, corruption, and failed leadership.
The governor’s woes began shortly after he assumed office. Promising a clean, technocratic government rooted in integrity, Mutai instead quickly surrounded himself with loyalists lacking experience, while sidelining seasoned professionals and community leaders.
His administration soon became the subject of whispers about inflated tenders, missing funds, and nepotistic appointments. Whistleblowers say the rot runs deep—from roads that exist only on paper to mysterious budget reallocations that have yet to be accounted for.
The County Assembly’s first impeachment attempt was based on these very concerns. Although Mutai survived after 34 Senators voted in his favour, the motion had earlier received overwhelming support from Kericho MCAs, signaling a loss of trust at the grassroots level. Since then, the relationship between the governor and the County Assembly has deteriorated beyond repair.
Night Meeting Reveals Deep Cracks in Mutai’s Administration
The latest impeachment bid—filed by Sigowet Ward MCA Kiprotich Rogony—comes just hours after reports emerged of a desperate nighttime meeting where Mutai tried to rally support from his Chief Officers and Executive Committee Members. That meeting, sources say, backfired when most officials refused to offer their loyalty.
Now, rather than face another bruising political battle and the threat of removal, Mutai has turned to Article 192 of the Constitution. His call for dissolution is being framed as a democratic fresh start. But critics argue it’s a smokescreen designed to delay accountability, erase evidence of corruption, and portray himself as a victim of political witch hunts.
The Constitutional Escape Hatch the Corrupt Governor is Exploiting
Article 192 of the Constitution of Kenya provides the legal pathway for suspending a county government, but it is rarely invoked—especially by a sitting governor against his own administration. The clause allows the President to suspend a county government in two circumstances: in case of an emergency arising out of internal conflict, or in “exceptional circumstances” that are defined by law.
Governor Erick Mutai now seeks to use this clause to reset his government through fresh elections. But the move raises serious constitutional and political questions. What exactly are the exceptional circumstances here? Is internal sabotage enough grounds to dissolve an entire administration? And more importantly, is this not a thinly veiled attempt to avoid facing the law?
Legal experts argue that Mutai’s move could set a dangerous precedent. If every governor facing political heat can simply cry foul and push for dissolution, then the integrity of devolved governance itself is under threat. Instead of using the Constitution as a shield against accountability, leaders must be held responsible for mismanagement and corruption—especially when they’ve had ample time to fix the rot.
If Mutai believes in transparency, why hasn’t he allowed a forensic audit of the county’s books? Why has he dismissed concerns raised by MCAs and civil society groups about poor service delivery and misuse of funds? Why is he mobilizing residents for signatures instead of first submitting himself to due process?
Erick Mutai’s Signature Drive and the Illusion of Public Support
Mutai’s next move is to launch a countywide signature drive to support his petition. At face value, it sounds democratic—let the people decide. But political analysts warn that such campaigns are often orchestrated PR stunts aimed at manufacturing consent rather than reflecting genuine public will.
Kericho residents are already grappling with deteriorating healthcare, stalled infrastructure projects, and poor sanitation services. Many view the governor’s latest theatrics as an insult to their intelligence—a diversion from the real issues plaguing the county. “We elected him to fix things, not run away when things get tough,” said one local trader in Kapkatet.
Behind closed doors, sources say even Ruto’s allies in the Rift Valley are losing patience with Mutai. The President, already battling economic headwinds and political unrest nationally, may not be keen to entertain a governor playing victim instead of cleaning up his house.
If the President yields to Mutai’s petition, it could embolden other struggling governors to make similar moves, paralyzing county governments across the country. That would be a nightmare scenario for the devolution agenda Ruto claims to support.
