Is the Impeachment Process a Tool of Accountability or Political Weaponry?

Kenya is at a critical juncture in its political and legal history with the impeachment of the Deputy President by the Senate. The process, based on 11 charges, was earlier endorsed by the National Assembly, which voted for his removal. The legal process has not been without controversy—30 petitions were filed challenging the constitutionality of the impeachment, but a three-judge bench consolidated these petitions and declined to issue conservatory orders, allowing the Senate to proceed.

During the hearings, a pivotal moment came when the mover of the impeachment motion, during cross-examination by renowned constitutional lawyer Elisha Ongoya, could not prove the allegations leveled against the Deputy President. Despite this, the Senate still voted for impeachment, raising even more questions about the integrity of the process.

Today, the National Assembly voted in favor of approving a new candidate as Deputy President, with 236 members supporting the motion. Yet, as of today, four new petitions have been filed, further challenging the impeachment process.

This sequence of events underscores a crucial question: Is the impeachment process truly a mechanism of accountability, or has it become a political weapon used to settle political scores?

While impeachment is designed to safeguard the public interest, the inability to substantiate key allegations raises serious concerns about whether the process is being used as intended.

As Kenya navigates this unprecedented political and legal terrain, the outcome will have significant implications for our democracy and constitutional governance.

#ConstitutionalLaw #Impeachment #Accountability #PoliticalWeaponry #Kenya #Leadership #RuleofLaw