Lobby files petition to overturn court’s decision on removal of Sabina Chege as Deputy Minority Whip

By , K24 Digital
On Thu, 19 Oct, 2023 13:12 | 3 mins read
Sabina Chege
Nominated Member of Parliament Sabina Chege. PHOTO/Facebook

A lobby group has filed a petition at the Court of Appeal seeking to overturn a decision to remove nominated Member of Parliament (MP) Sabina Chege as the Deputy Minority Whip.

An appeal filed at the Appellant Court by the Association of Friends of Youth and Women now wants the court to move swiftly and issue orders barring the Speaker of the National Assembly Moses Wetangula, his clerk and Attorney General Justin Muturi from implementing the decision to remove Chege from the position.

"Pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal, this Honourable Court be pleased to issue a temporary injunction to restrain the respondents herein from implementing the decision to remove the Hon. Sabina Chege from the office of the Deputy Minority Whip as communicated by the speaker of the National Assembly on May 4, 2023," the lobby group states in the appeal papers.

Through lawyer Brain Khaemba, the lobby group says they are aggrieved by the ruling of Kiambu High Court Judge Dorah Chepkwony dated October 9, 2023, that struck out the case challenging Azimio la Umoja's decision to remove Chege from the position.

In her ruling, Justice Chepkwony dismissed the suit on account that she had not exhausted all the available alternative dispute resolution mechanisms as provided under the Political Parties Act and hence the court did not have the jurisdiction to hear and determine her petition.

"The Appellant herein is gravely dissatisfied with the decision of the superior court as its main bone of contention was the constitutionality of the National Assembly Standing Orders No. 20 A (4) and (5) as it is now trite that it is only the High Court that is vested with the requisite jurisdiction under Article 165 (3) (d) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 to adjudicate matters of constitutional interpretation and to hear and determine the legality or otherwise the constitutionality of the any provision of the law or any action said to be done under the authority of the constitution or any other written law," Khaemba states.

The lawyer adds that the decision of the court has unfairly driven his client from the seat of justice with nowhere else to go and thus intends to appeal against the said decision.

While seeking the conservatory orders, the lobby group says Wetangula and Muturi may at any time proceed to approve or rubberstamp the decision to remove or replace Chege as the Deputy Minority Whip and which action if allowed to take place, will render their intended appeal nugatory and an academic exercise.

"The applicant has an arguable appeal with a high likelihood of success as it can be gleaned from its draft Memorandum of Appeal but the same stands to be rendered nugatory and an academic exercise if this honourable court is not pleased to intervene immediately," Khaemba says.

Chege had filed a petition at a Kiambu court contesting Azimio’s decision to replace her with Embakasi West MP Mark Muriithi Mwenje.

Azimio Parliamentary Group resolved to have Mwenje replace Chege as the House Minority Deputy Whip in May this year.

The move to replace Chege, who had shifted her allegiance to President William Ruto’s Kenya Kwanza alliance, came amid internal party wrangles that saw retired President Uhuru Kenyatta loyalists evicted from leadership slots.

National Assembly Minority Leader Opiyo Wandayi said the resolution to replace Chege was backed by 130 Azimio members including party leaders.

Wandayi argued that the move aligned with resolutions made by Azimio’s affiliate party, Jubilee, regarding changes in party leadership.

Chege immediately challenged her suspension following the emergence of a rival faction of the former ruling party led by Kanini Kega as Secretary General and herself as Party Leader.

In her affidavit, Chege noted that the decision to remove her was made in an obviously malicious manner and that she was unaware of the decision.

“If there was such a decision to remove me, the process was unlawful, unconstitutional, un-procedural, inconsistent, contradictory, and ultra-vires the provision and procedure of the law,” she said.

The matter is pending directions and a hearing.

Related Topics