APPEAL

Court to hear Sonko impeachment appeal from December 1

Judges had ruled that his conduct does not meet the highest standard expected of a governor.

In Summary

• Sonko appealed and it is that appeal that is set to be heard on December 1.

• Sonko in his court documents argues that the procedure adopted in his impeachment process at the county assembly was flawed.

Former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko.
Former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko.
Image: FILE

The Court of Appeal will begin to hear former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko’s impeachment case from December 1.

In the appeal, Sonko is challenging a decision by the High Court that upheld the decision by the Senate and city county assembly to remove him from office.

In June this year, Justices Said Chitembwe, Wilfrida Okwany and Weldon Korir said they cannot fault the assembly and Senate as they fully complied with the Constitution.

“We do not see any external hand in his impeachment,” they ruled.

Aggrieved with that decision, Sonko appealed and it is that appeal that is set to be heard on December 1.

Sonko in his court documents argues that the procedure adopted in his impeachment process at the county assembly was flawed.

He claims no verification was done by members of the assembly supporting the motion for his removal as provided under the standing orders.

“This important step was passed by and no affirmation or verification was conducted as prescribed under standing orders and the motion was tabled before the county assembly. The standing orders which sets the procedure for the removal of a Governor was flouted.”

The motion was received by the speaker on November 26 last year and tabled in the house of the county assembly on December 3 last year.

“The motion having been received by the speaker on 26 November, 3 December was the last day. It is therefore clear that seven days had not lapsed at the time it was tabled in the house.”

Standing order number 67 provides that an impeachment motion shall be placed on the order paper upon expiry of seven days.

He also argues no evidence was laid before court in support of the allegations that he alleged he was intoxicated when he signed the deed of transfer to the NMS at State House.

Such a statement he says does not justify removal of a governor popularly elected by the residents of Nairobi city from office through impeachment.

The High Court judges had ruled that his conduct does not meet the highest standard expected of a governor.

“The deed of transfer is an important document that cannot be seen to have been dealt with in circumstances where the governor was not sure of,” said Chitembwe.