The Milimani High Court has upheld the impeachment of Meru Governor Kawira Mwangaza, dismissing her petition that sought to overturn the Senate’s decision to remove her from office.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Bahati Mwamuye, affirmed that the impeachment process was conducted lawfully and in accordance with constitutional provisions, rejecting Mwangaza’s claims that her rights had been violated.
Governor Mwangaza had challenged the impeachment, arguing that the process violated her right to a fair hearing, lacked sufficient public participation, and was based on matters that were already pending before the High Court in Meru.
She also contended that the Senate acted in defiance of a valid court order and that the charges against her did not meet the constitutional threshold required for impeachment.
The amended petition she filed named Senate Speaker Amason Kingi as the respondent, holding him accountable both personally and on behalf of the Senate.
The Senate, through its Speaker, defended the impeachment, maintaining that it had followed due process and that Mwangaza had been given ample opportunity to defend herself.
The court examined several key legal questions, including whether the Speaker was a proper party to be sued, whether the Senate had violated a court order, and whether the sub judice principle had been breached.
It also considered whether the section of the County Governments Act governing impeachment was unconstitutional, whether the required level of public participation had been met, and whether Mwangaza’s right to a fair hearing had been infringed upon.
In its ruling, the court determined that the Senate had adhered to constitutional procedures.
It found that Speaker Kingi was a proper party to be sued in the matter and that the Senate had not acted in deliberate defiance of a court order, as it was not a party to the case referenced in Meru.
The court also ruled that the impeachment proceedings did not prejudice any ongoing litigation and that the matter concerning the constitutionality of the County Governments Act had already been placed before the High Court in Meru for determination.
Furthermore, it held that the issue of public participation, which was central to Mwangaza’s case, was also a key element in the Meru High Court case that preceded the petition in Milimani.
Ultimately, the court found that the impeachment met the constitutional threshold and that no legal basis existed for overturning the Senate’s decision.
The ruling also upheld the official gazette notice that had communicated Mwangaza’s removal from office, affirming the validity of the Senate’s resolution. Each party in the case was ordered to bear its own legal costs.
The verdict triggered mixed reactions across Meru County. In Igembe, a section of residents erupted in celebration, taking to the streets to sing, dance, and blow whistles and vuvuzelas while waving twigs in the air.
Many viewed the ruling as a victory for justice and accountability, marking what they considered the end of a contentious leadership period in the county.
However, not everyone welcomed the decision. Some of Mwangaza’s supporters expressed outrage, alleging that the ruling was politically influenced.
Discussions on social media reflected deep divisions, with some suggesting that gender bias played a role in her removal, while others claimed that the judiciary had succumbed to political pressure.
There were also speculations that the President had faced mounting pressure from local political leaders who had threatened to rally against his administration if the court did not uphold the impeachment.
Amid the contrasting reactions, Mwangaza’s next course of action remains uncertain. With her supporters vowing to seek justice through the Court of Appeal, the legal battle may not be over yet.
For now, the ruling stands, marking a significant political shift in Meru County and potentially reshaping its leadership landscape.
Share This Post
