Kericho Governor Eric Mutai pleaded “not guilty” to all three grounds for the impeachment brought against him by the County Assembly as his trial began in the Senate on Wednesday, August 27.
Taking to the stand, Mutai listened keenly as the three charges of gross violation of the constitution and other laws, gross misconduct, and abuse of office were read out to him.
Despite the substantial accusations, the trial may come down to the technicality of the process used to oust the county boss. Lawyers for both parties had a heated exchange over the validity of the electronic vote taken by the MCAs on August 15.
According to the governor’s defence team, led by Senior Counsel Katwa Kigen, the county legislators debuted a new system that had not been tried, arguing that it was not in order for it to be deployed for a sensitive matter like the impeachment of a governor.
Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp
Further, they alleged that MCAs were sent the shareable link on their phones, adding that it was misused after four MCAs voted despite being absent. Another three voted twice, including the mover of the motion, Sigowet MCA Kiprotich Rogony.
18 MCAs have allegedly disputed the voting record, casting doubts on whether the two-thirds threshold for impeachment was met.
“There was no voting that took place. It implicates the requirement that voting must have been done at the assembly and that a two-thirds threshold must have been achieved…This voting system was not accurate, verifiable, or auditable,” said lawyer Kigen.
“If there are any doubts in your (senators) minds that this system might not have been foolproof, that is enough reason for you to decline entertaining and determining this motion,” he added.
However, the County Assembly’s legal team, led by seasoned impeachment lawyer Elisha Ongoya, and comprising lawyer Elias Mutuma, refuted the allegations, terming the system as tamper-proof and technologically advanced with audit trails for verification.
In his rebuttal, Ongoya insisted that some of the discrepancies raised by the governor were due to printing errors, adding that they would be proven in the fullness of the trial.
“To say that because Kericho County Assembly has technologically advanced that people can press electronic buttons as we do with our smartphones and should therefore be faulted must be a sad day for governance in this country,” said Ongoya.
“Certain MCAs have sworn affidavits distancing themselves from the vote. This isn’t a new game in town. It happened in the Mike Sonko case. Court determined the Hansard as the authoritative source of information unless they attend this trial for their evidence to be tested,” he argued.
Members of the Kericho County Assembly voted to impeach Governor Mutai on August 15, their second attempt after the Senate thwarted a similar plot in October 2024.
33 MCAs out of the 47 voted in favour of the ouster motion surpassing the two-thirds constitutional requirement for the passage of such a moton.
The County Assembly will be keen to avoid dismissal of their bid as happened last year when senators determined that the assembly failed to meet the two-thirds threshold by a single vote, getting 31 instead of 32 votes.
Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp
Kericho Governor Eric Mutai pleaded “not guilty” to all three grounds for the impeachment brought against him by the County Assembly as his trial began in the Senate on Wednesday, August 27.
Taking to the stand, Mutai listened keenly as the three charges of gross violation of the constitution and other laws, gross misconduct, and abuse of office were read out to him.
Despite the substantial accusations, the trial may come down to the technicality of the process used to oust the county boss. Lawyers for both parties had a heated exchange over the validity of the electronic vote taken by the MCAs on August 15.
According to the governor’s defence team, led by Senior Counsel Katwa Kigen, the county legislators debuted a new system that had not been tried, arguing that it was not in order for it to be deployed for a sensitive matter like the impeachment of a governor.
Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp
Further, they alleged that MCAs were sent the shareable link on their phones, adding that it was misused after four MCAs voted despite being absent. Another three voted twice, including the mover of the motion, Sigowet MCA Kiprotich Rogony.
18 MCAs have allegedly disputed the voting record, casting doubts on whether the two-thirds threshold for impeachment was met.
“There was no voting that took place. It implicates the requirement that voting must have been done at the assembly and that a two-thirds threshold must have been achieved…This voting system was not accurate, verifiable, or auditable,” said lawyer Kigen.
“If there are any doubts in your (senators) minds that this system might not have been foolproof, that is enough reason for you to decline entertaining and determining this motion,” he added.
However, the County Assembly’s legal team, led by seasoned impeachment lawyer Elisha Ongoya, and comprising lawyer Elias Mutuma, refuted the allegations, terming the system as tamper-proof and technologically advanced with audit trails for verification.
In his rebuttal, Ongoya insisted that some of the discrepancies raised by the governor were due to printing errors, adding that they would be proven in the fullness of the trial.
“To say that because Kericho County Assembly has technologically advanced that people can press electronic buttons as we do with our smartphones and should therefore be faulted must be a sad day for governance in this country,” said Ongoya.
“Certain MCAs have sworn affidavits distancing themselves from the vote. This isn’t a new game in town. It happened in the Mike Sonko case. Court determined the Hansard as the authoritative source of information unless they attend this trial for their evidence to be tested,” he argued.
Members of the Kericho County Assembly voted to impeach Governor Mutai on August 15, their second attempt after the Senate thwarted a similar plot in October 2024.
33 MCAs out of the 47 voted in favour of the ouster motion surpassing the two-thirds constitutional requirement for the passage of such a moton.
The County Assembly will be keen to avoid dismissal of their bid as happened last year when senators determined that the assembly failed to meet the two-thirds threshold by a single vote, getting 31 instead of 32 votes.
Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter
Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp
By Denis Omondi