Legal Limbo: Sifuna Questions Wetangula’s Authority in Sabina Chege’s Ouster Case
Edwin Sifuna, a senator from Nairobi, now claims that the court order cited by National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetangula during Thursday’s decision to retain Sabina Chege as the House’s Deputy Minority Whip is suspect.
Sifuna stated during Thursday night’s broadcast of Citizen TV’s ‘Tonight’ program that the court order in question had not been served to the minority side before the ruling and may be questionable because it violates the Parliamentary standing orders.
The Senate Deputy Minority Whip argued that if Wetangula was issued a court order, he should have served the minority Azimio la Umoja One Kenya side as the respondents.
“First of all, I do not believe there is a court order because I have not seen it. “Until I see it, it makes absolutely no sense to me,” said Sifuna.
“The method of communication…if you have a court order affecting me, you must serve me. If Deputy Minority Leader Robert Mbui has not seen the court order and Wetangula has not shown the order to the minority party, then the order is suspicious.”
ALSO READ: Landmark Court Ruling Rescues Sabina Chege in Parliament as Azimio Legislators Stand Firm
Furthermore, the lawmaker questioned the legality of the alleged order prohibiting Sabina’s removal, stating that no court or High Court judge of good standing would have issued it because it is illegal.
According to the Senator, the standing orders of both Houses prohibit the Speaker from determining the leadership of any political party; therefore, any judge would have redirected the petitioner to the party’s dispute-resolution mechanisms.
Sifuna stated, “A court applying its judicious mind appropriately to such an application would be hesitant to issue a court order when challenging something passed a year ago.”
“It reeks of forum shopping where people have identified a court that can issue favorable orders, reeks of interference by unseen hands, and is wrong on all fronts because the standing orders of the National Assembly are identical to those of the Senate and the Speaker has no role in determining the leadership of the minority side.”
He added, “During the previous administration, there was a fear of fake court orders, and the Judiciary had to develop a court order with a code so that you can verify with the Registrar that this is a real court because I don’t believe a High Court judge would issue such an order knowing that there is a forum for dispute resolution involving political parties and their members.”
ALSO READ: Raila Unveils Weekly Protests to Challenge Ruto’s Finance Bill and Demand Change
The Nominated Senator of the ruling United Democratic Alliance (UDA) party, Veronica Maina, who was also on the platform, dismissed Sifuna’s remarks against Speaker Wetangula as mere assumptions.
Maina defended Wetangula, reiterating that a leader of his caliber would not cite a nonexistent court order and noting that Wetangula cannot be blamed for any illegality committed by the court because he is legally bound to obey court orders.
“Sifuna’s response is presumptive because he suspects no court order exists. “I believe it is extremely unlikely that a Speaker of Wetangula’s stature would cite a nonexistent court order,” she stated.
“It is beyond the Speaker’s ability to determine whether a court order is coming from the correct court or the wrong court if a person believes they will challenge the jurisdiction of that court; once a person is served with a court order, they are required to comply.”
Legal Limbo: Sifuna Questions Wetangula’s Authority in Sabina Chege’s Ouster Case
HEY READER. PLEASE SUPPORT THIS SITE BY CLICKING ADS. DON’T FORGET TO HIT THE NOTIFICATION BELL FOR MORE UPDATES AROUND THE GLOBE.
