NAIROBI, Kenya—National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula has dismissed calls for his resignation after a High Court ruling deemed his simultaneous role as Speaker and leader of Ford Kenya unconstitutional.
The judgment, delivered by a three-judge bench on Friday, also recognised the Azimio coalition as the majority in the National Assembly, with Kenya Kwanza relegated to the minority.
Speaking in the House in response to Mbita MP Millie Odhiambo, who raised concerns over his continued leadership, Wetang’ula remained resolute, insisting that the ruling did not mandate his resignation.
“I have read that judgment with a toothcomb, and there is nowhere it requires the Speaker to do as you are saying,” Wetang’ula asserted.
Odhiambo, invoking a standing order, argued that Wetang’ula’s party leadership created a conflict of interest, calling on him to step aside and allow his deputy to preside over House proceedings.
However, Wetang’ula dismissed the suggestion, citing precedents from past parliaments where similar concerns were raised but did not lead to the removal of a sitting Speaker.
He referenced cases involving former Speakers Justin Muturi and Francis Ole Kaparo, who presided over debates on motions challenging their positions but remained in office.
“I’m sure you know that neither Kaparo nor Muturi left office on the basis of any motion,” he stated.
The Speaker maintained that his role was to preside over proceedings impartially and not participate in debates or voting.
He assured MPs that he would allow discussions on the ruling but emphasized that any decision regarding his position could only be made through parliamentary procedures.
“It must be made very clear as we listen to each other that neither the court nor any authority outside this chamber can dictate how business is conducted here, except yourselves by voting and the Speaker delivering a ruling,” he said.
Wetang’ula further described the National Assembly as a quasi-judicial body and pledged to issue a fair ruling after hearing all perspectives.
He also cautioned MPs against making disparaging remarks about judges, stating that the focus should remain on analyzing the judgment rather than attacking the judiciary.
