In a decisive ruling on Tuesday, July 8, 2025, the Kenyan Senate dismissed an impeachment motion against Isiolo Governor Abdi Ibrahim Guyo, citing significant procedural irregularities in the Isiolo County Assembly’s handling of the process.
The decision, backed by 31 Senators against 12, ensures that Governor Guyo remains in office, averting a full trial and exposing deep-seated political tensions within Isiolo County.
This landmark case has sparked a broader conversation about accountability, due process, and the rule of law in Kenya’s devolved governance system.
The Impeachment Motion: A Controversial Push
The impeachment motion, initially endorsed by 16 out of 18 Members of the County Assembly (MCAs) on June 26, 2025, leveled serious allegations against Governor Guyo. The charges included violating the Constitution, abuse of office, and gross misconduct—accusations that, if substantiated, could have led to his removal from office.
However, the motion never progressed to a full trial, as the Senate upheld preliminary objections raised by the Governor’s legal team, effectively nullifying the entire process.
The Senate’s ruling hinged on the County Assembly’s failure to adhere to proper legal and procedural standards. According to the Governor’s lawyers, led by Eric Theuri and Elias Mutuma, the impeachment process was riddled with flaws, rendering it a “phantom impeachment.”
Their arguments centered on the absence of valid County Assembly sittings on June 18 and 26, inconsistent records, and unverified or misleading documentation.
Procedural Irregularities Under Scrutiny
A key point of contention was the discrepancy in the County Assembly’s records. Theuri highlighted that a special sitting notice for June 26 was scheduled for 9:00 AM, yet the Hansard—the official record of proceedings—indicated the sitting occurred at 2:30 PM.
This inconsistency raised doubts about whether a legitimate sitting took place at all. Furthermore, the legal team argued that there was no formal resolution by the County Assembly to impeach the Governor, a critical requirement under Kenyan law.
Theuri also accused the Assembly of defying conservatory court orders that had temporarily halted the impeachment process, further undermining its legitimacy. “There was no valid sitting of the County Assembly,” he told the Senate, describing the motion as a sham designed to oust the Governor without due process.
Senators echoed these concerns, expressing frustration over the County Assembly’s apparent disregard for legal protocols. Kakamega Senator Boni Khalwale emphasized the importance of procedure, stating, “The process is just as important as the reasons for removal.”
Tana River Senator Danson Mungatana dismissed the evidence submitted by the Assembly as “a waste of time,” while Kitui Senator Enock Wambua warned that bypassing legal procedures could set a dangerous precedent for future impeachment cases.
Nairobi Senator Karen Nyamu delivered a scathing critique, calling the motion “a joke—and a dangerous one.”
She questioned the audacity of the Isiolo MCAs, asking, “Where did they get the courage to walk into this Senate without a shred of evidence that a sitting of the County Assembly ever took place? This is not a WhatsApp group; this is a constitutional institution. Where is the Hansard? Where is the attendance record? There was no sitting, and there was no impeachment.”
Senate Vote: A Resounding Rejection
After deliberating on the preliminary objections, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to dismiss the impeachment motion.
Of the 43 Senators present, 31 supported the decision to throw out the case, while 12 voted in favor of proceeding to a full hearing. No Senators abstained, signaling a clear consensus on the procedural flaws that marred the process.
Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei underscored the Senate’s commitment to upholding the rule of law, stating, “We only deal with the rule of law.”
The ruling not only spared Governor Guyo but also sent a strong message to county assemblies nationwide about the importance of adhering to constitutional and legal standards in impeachment proceedings.
Political Divisions and Broader Implications
While Governor Guyo’s position is now secure, the impeachment saga has laid bare the deep political divisions within Isiolo County.
The motion, backed by a near-unanimous MCA vote, suggests significant discontent among local leaders, possibly fueled by political rivalries or competing interests. However, the Senate’s ruling has shifted the spotlight onto the County Assembly, raising questions about its competence and integrity.
Senator Khalwale expressed alarm at the growing trend of county assemblies acting with impunity, noting, “County assemblies are becoming increasingly fearless—they no longer seem to fear the law, the people, or even the Senate.”
This sentiment reflects broader concerns about accountability and governance at the county level, where political disputes often spill over into legal battles.
The case also highlights the critical role of the Senate as a check on county-level processes. By rejecting the motion on procedural grounds, the Senate reaffirmed its mandate to safeguard the rule of law and protect public officials from politically motivated or poorly executed impeachment attempts.
However, it also underscores the need for clearer guidelines and stricter oversight to prevent similar controversies in the future.
What’s Next for Isiolo County?
For Governor Abdi Guyo, the Senate’s ruling is a significant victory, allowing him to continue leading Isiolo County without the immediate threat of removal.
However, the political fallout from the impeachment attempt may linger, potentially complicating his administration’s efforts to unify the county’s leadership and address pressing development challenges.
The controversy has also sparked a renewed debate about the balance between accountability and due process in Kenya’s devolved system.
While MCAs have the constitutional authority to hold governors accountable through impeachment, the Isiolo case demonstrates the risks of abusing this power or failing to follow proper procedures.
Moving forward, stakeholders may push for reforms to strengthen the impeachment process, ensuring it serves as a tool for accountability rather than a weapon for political vendettas.
What Next?
The Senate’s dismissal of the impeachment motion against Isiolo Governor Abdi Guyo marks a pivotal moment in Kenyan county politics.
By prioritizing procedural integrity over political expediency, the Senate has upheld the rule of law and set a precedent for future cases.
However, the episode also exposes the fragility of devolved governance, where political rivalries and procedural lapses can undermine public trust.
As Isiolo County moves past this controversy, the focus must shift to fostering unity, strengthening institutions, and delivering on the promise of devolution. For now, Governor Guyo remains at the helm, but the lessons from this impeachment saga will resonate far beyond Isiolo’s borders.
Share This Post