•Ruto has asked the High court to dismiss the case on grounds of jurisdiction.
•Kirungia claims Ruto has abdicated his constitutional role as the principal assistant to the president.
Image: EZEKIEL AMINGA
Deputy President William Ruto has said a case filed by a Mau Mau veteran seeking his removal from office is politically motivated and geared towards a certain individual's interest.
Ruto, in response to the suit, does not mention who the individual is but has asked the High court to dismiss the case on grounds of jurisdiction.
He argues that the power to remove him from office is not the preserve of the court but Parliament through impeachment.
“The question of the removal of the deputy president from office is a business expressly reserved for the legislative arm of the government. This court lacks the power to issue the orders sought. The suit offends the doctrine of separation of powers,” he says.
The DP has been under pressure from his boss Uhuru Kenyatta and other leaders who have dared him to resign.
During this year's labour day celebrations, Uhuru accused him of absconding duty, inciting Kenyans against the government and refusing to pave way for a replacement. But Ruto in a rejoinder hit back, saying Uhuru sabotaged his own government.
And in the present case, Michael Kirungia claims Ruto has abdicated his constitutional role as the principal assistant to the president and embarked on “self-assigned duties”
He wants him removed from office for allegedly not performing the functions conferred by the constitution and any other functions that the president may assign.
But Ruto, in documents filed before the court, claims that throughout his tenure of office, he wholeheartedly carried out his mandate as stipulated in the constitution.
“There has been no iota of evidence from Kirungia or from any other quarter tabled before this court to support the assertion that I have acted in a manner that is contrary to the law,” he says through Mutuma Gichuru and Associates.
Ruto says the suit has been overtaken by events being that his tenure of office is set to expire in a month’s time.
“Additionally, the application is lacking credible evidence. It is based on mere assertions and allegations which have no power to invoke the court's jurisdiction,” he says.
Kirungia in his papers wants him restrained from using the office of the DP and DP Residential home in conducting meetings of UDA until the case is heard and determined.