NAIROBI, Kenya — Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi has backed calls to arrest governors who refuse to appear before the Senate, arguing that failure to enforce oversight summons would weaken accountability and embolden corruption in counties.
Reacting to reports that Inspector-General Douglas Kanja supports the enforcement of Senate summons, Ahmednasir said both the police chief and the Senate are right.
“If a governor refuses to appear before the Senate oversight committee, the police should arrest him and frogmarch him to the Senate,” he said in a post on X.
He argued that, once before the committee, a governor should be compelled to explain himself fully, including disclosing any alleged attempts at bribery involving senators.
“Once he is there, he can name the Senators he bribed or refused to bribe. Once the session is over, the governor must report to the nearest police station the issues of his giving or refusing to bribe the senator(s),” he said.
Ahmednasir warned that allowing governors to decide whether to honour summons would undermine the Senate’s constitutional mandate.
“The day we allow some governors to decide whether or not they will appear before the Senate is the day we kill Senate oversight and legitimise grand looting of counties,” he added.
Under Article 96 of the Constitution, the Senate represents counties and serves to protect their interests, including exercising oversight over national revenue allocated to county governments. Article 125 further grants Parliament and its committees powers to summon any person to appear before them for purposes of giving evidence or providing information.
The Inspector-General has stated publicly that the National Police Service is ready to enforce lawful orders issued by parliamentary committees, reinforcing the principle that no public officer is above the law.
The standoff between some governors and Senate committees has reignited debate over the scope of legislative oversight and the limits of executive autonomy at the county level. While governors have occasionally challenged summons on procedural or jurisdictional grounds, legal experts note that non-compliance without a court order may expose officials to enforcement measures.
Ahmednasir’s remarks reflect a broader argument within legal and governance circles: that effective devolution depends not only on financial transfers but also on strict accountability mechanisms. In his view, firm enforcement of Senate summons is not political theatre but a constitutional necessity.
As the debate unfolds, the key test will be whether oversight institutions can assert their authority without tipping into institutional confrontation — and whether the rule of law remains the guiding principle in disputes between county executives and Parliament.
