Meru, Kenya| In a landmark ruling, the High Court in Meru has declared the impeachment of Isiolo Governor Abdi Ibrahim Guyo null and void, delivering a major legal and political victory for the embattled county chief.
Justice Heston Nyaga, presiding over the matter, affirmed that conservatory orders issued on June 23, 2025, remained valid and in effect, effectively freezing all attempts by the Isiolo County Assembly to remove the governor from office.
The ruling reinforces judicial authority and places the Senate on notice against any further steps that would undermine court directives.
This decision has reignited national discourse around constitutionalism, due process, and the increasingly volatile political landscape in Isiolo County.
Genesis of the Impeachment Push
The impeachment saga was initiated on June 10, 2025, when Sericho MCA Abubakar Godana introduced a motion in the Isiolo County Assembly, leveling serious allegations against Governor Guyo. The claims ranged from gross misconduct to administrative irregularities.
Among the accusations were:
Stalled Development Projects: Claims that the governor’s administration had not completed key initiatives.
Revenue Underperformance: Allegations that Guyo’s administration failed to meet local revenue targets.
Irregular Appointments: The motion cited appointments exceeding guidelines set by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission, including 36 advisors and 31 chief officers.
Alleged Derogatory Remarks: Accusations that the governor had made sexist remarks toward Senator Fatuma Dullo during Madaraka Day celebrations.
Neglect of Duties: Claims that the governor spent excessive time in Nairobi at the expense of county responsibilities.
On June 26, in a highly charged and heavily guarded assembly session, 16 of 18 MCAs reportedly voted in favor of the motion.
Speaker Mohamed Roba Roba then transmitted the impeachment to the Senate, as mandated by Article 181 of the Constitution and Section 33 of the County Governments Act.
However, the process was marred by allegations of lawlessness, with reports of teargas, protests, and police deployment outside the assembly chamber, casting doubt on the legitimacy and integrity of the sitting.
Court Slams Brakes on Assembly and Senate
The High Court’s intervention followed a petition filed by Abdi Hassan, who challenged the legality of the impeachment process.
On June 23, Justice Nyaga had issued conservatory orders halting the proceedings, citing the need to uphold fair hearing rights and constitutional safeguards.
Despite these clear orders, the County Assembly proceeded with the vote on June 26. In response, Justice Nyaga on June 27 reaffirmed the court’s position:
“The orders dated June 23, 2025, are still in force. Any acts by the respondents or any other party, in defiance of the court order, shall be null and void,” he ruled.
The judge warned the Senate not to entertain or act on the impeachment, saying any such move would amount to direct defiance of the Judiciary and could trigger legal consequences.
Furthermore, Justice Nyaga summoned Speaker Mohamed Roba and Clerk Salad Boru Guracha to appear before the court on June 30 to respond to contempt of court allegations.
While allowing the respondents’ legal counsel, led by Dr. Ekuru Aukot, to file applications for recusal or a stay, the court insisted that compliance with existing orders must be addressed first.
“Recusal does not shield the respondents from obeying court orders,” the judge stated pointedly, emphasizing that respect for the rule of law remains paramount.
Conflicting Claims, Political Infighting, and Emerging Fault Lines
The impeachment drama has exposed deep fractures within Isiolo’s political establishment.
On June 26, Clerk Salad Boru — who had earlier been controversially sent on compulsory leave — released a public statement asserting that the County Assembly had not legally convened.
He denounced the reported impeachment as “politically motivated misinformation” and insisted that no legitimate session had taken place, citing the binding conservatory orders.
Boru, recently reinstated by the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nyeri, also reaffirmed his position as the bona fide Clerk of the Assembly, undermining attempts by rival factions to replace him.
Governor Guyo, for his part, swiftly dismissed the impeachment as unconstitutional and procedurally flawed, noting that he had not been afforded a fair hearing in line with Article 50 of the Constitution.
His office pointed to the chaotic and militarized nature of the assembly proceedings as further evidence of a compromised and unlawful process.
The Isiolo Somali Council of Elders, led by Chairperson Abdulkadir Shariff Abdullahi, has also entered the fray, calling for calm and national dialogue.
The elders urged restraint from all political actors, warning that the impeachment crisis risks inflaming long-standing ethnic and political tensions in the county.
They proposed alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and stressed that removal from office should be considered only after all reconciliation avenues are exhausted.
Broader Ramifications for Devolution and Governance
The High Court’s verdict sends a powerful message about the importance of judicial oversight in the devolution framework.
By nullifying the impeachment, the court has not only protected Governor Guyo from what increasingly appears to be a politically engineered removal, but has also reasserted the role of courts in curbing unconstitutional overreach by county assemblies.
For Governor Guyo, the ruling offers a reprieve and space to continue discharging his mandate — pending further legal proceedings. It also shifts scrutiny toward the County Assembly, whose actions are now under judicial investigation for possible contempt.
The Senate, which had been poised to consider the impeachment, now finds itself at a crossroads, faced with a binding court order and a delicate constitutional balance.
While the impeachment allegations touched on issues of governance and public accountability, the disorderly manner in which the assembly handled the motion has raised even more serious questions about the motives behind the process — and whether the law was weaponized for political gain.
The Road Ahead
The court has scheduled a mention for June 30, 2025, to evaluate compliance with its orders and issue further directions.
The respondents have been given seven days to file their responses, while the petitioner may submit a supplementary affidavit within three days thereafter.
What happens next will determine whether the impeachment motion can be revived — or if Governor Guyo’s hold on power remains intact.
In the meantime, community leaders, civil society, and county residents are calling for sobriety, dialogue, and a renewed commitment to service delivery over political theatrics.
The Somali Council of Elders’ push for mediation underscores a wider yearning for peace and unity in a county that has often stood at the intersection of ethnic diversity and political tension.
What Next?
The Meru High Court’s nullification of Governor Abdi Guyo’s impeachment marks a turning point in Isiolo’s governance.
The ruling not only vindicates the governor but also reinforces constitutionalism and the supremacy of judicial authority.
As the legal and political drama unfolds, all eyes will remain fixed on the courts, the Senate, and Isiolo’s local leadership.
In the end, the ultimate test will be whether the rule of law — and the will of Isiolo residents — can triumph over chaos, coercion, and political expediency.
