The August House is embroiled in a heated dispute over which coalition holds the majority, following a recent High Court ruling that declared Speaker Moses Wetang’ula’s 2022 decision unconstitutional.
As the verbal sparring continues,all eyes are on Speaker Wetang’ula’s ruling effect on the House’s majority and minority status. The decision carries significant implications for legislative proceedings and the balance of power within the National Assembly. Both coalitions are preparing for a protracted battle, with potential appeals and further legal challenges on the horizon.
The ruling has intensified tensions between the Azimio la Umoja One Kenya coalition and the Kenya Kwanza alliance, leading to confrontations on the parliamentary floor and a flurry of political statements.
On 7 February 2025, a three-judge bench comprising Justices John Chigiti, Lawrence Mugambi, and Jairus Ngaah ruled that Speaker Wetang’ula violated the Constitution by declaring Kenya Kwanza as the majority in 2022.
The court found no evidence that five political parties had formally exited the Azimio coalition to join Kenya Kwanza through the necessary post-election agreements. Consequently, the court quashed Wetang’ula’s 6 October 2022, ruling, rendering it null and void.
In response to the court’s decision, Azimio MPs occupied the majority side of the House during the session on 11 February 2025. This move led to chaotic scenes as they demanded the immediate implementation of the court’s ruling.
Suba North MP Millie Odhiambo called for Speaker Wetang’ula to step down, citing a conflict of interest due to his concurrent role as Ford Kenya party leader. She urged Deputy Speaker Gladys Boss Shollei to take over the proceedings.
Suna East MP and House Minority Whip Junet Mohamed emphasized the necessity of adhering to the court’s judgment.
“A court ruling has only two options—obey it or appeal it. There is no third way,” he stated, expressing readiness to assume the role of Majority Leader.
Speaker Wetang’ula dismissed calls for his resignation, asserting that the court’s judgment did not mandate his removal.
“There’s no motion before this House about the Speaker. I am your senior lawyer; I have read that judgment, and there’s nowhere it requires me to do that,” he responded.
Wetang’ula maintained that the authority to determine the majority and minority sides in Parliament rests with the Speaker, not the judiciary.
The court’s ruling has elicited varied responses across the political spectrum. Migori Senator Eddy Oketch criticized Wetang’ula for allegedly violating the law to serve the Executive’s interests. He called for Junet Mohamed and Millie Odhiambo to be recognized as Majority Leader and Majority Whip, respectively.
Rarieda MP Otiende Amollo underscored the importance of respecting the rule of law, stating that the court’s decision must be implemented unless successfully appealed.
“If we respect the rule of law, let it be appealed. Until then, it must be implemented,” he asserted.
On the other hand, Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah contended that the court’s ruling did not explicitly determine the majority and minority sides.
“The ruling only annulled your [Wetang’ula’s] October 2022 decision. The effect is that we revert to the status quo as of 9 August 2022,” he argued.
The High Court’s decision also addressed the Speaker’s dual role, declaring it unlawful for Wetang’ula to serve as both National Assembly Speaker and leader of the Ford Kenya party. The court emphasized that holding a party leadership position undermines the neutrality required of the Speaker’s role.
This aspect of the ruling has prompted further debate about the separation of powers and the independence of Parliament. Some lawmakers argue that the judiciary is overstepping its mandate by interfering in parliamentary affairs, while others insist that constitutional adherence is paramount.
