The legal team representing National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula has dismissed assertions that the recent court ruling reviewed the status of the leadership of the House.
The counsel maintains that there is no confusion over the Court ruling on Wetang’ula’s decision in the house
Lawyer Milimo Kitinda said the Speaker’s communication to the house on February 12th 2025 remains unchallenged.
Speaking in his office, Milimo asserted that the Speaker’s most recent decision on majority and minority leadership remains legally binding.
“No court has overturned or disagreed with his decision that Kenya Kwanza is the majority in the National Assembly,” he said.
Kitinda further emphasized that the High Court ruling had created a leadership vacuum, which the Speaker had a constitutional duty to fill.
“The High Court’s decision nullified the Speaker’s October 2022 ruling, effectively creating a gap. As the constitutional authority on parliamentary leadership, the Speaker was obligated to address that vacuum,” he explained.
One of the key arguments in the appeal was whether parliamentary coalitions remain static throughout an electoral cycle.
The National Assembly contended that political parties and members have a constitutional right to shift affiliations post-election.
“The idea that political alignment at the time of elections must remain unchanged for five years is legally unsound,” Kitinda noted.
He argued that coalition agreements are fluid and subject to evolving political interests.
“The law permits parties to realign post-election. For instance, Narc-Kenya withdrew from Azimio. Would anyone argue that it is still bound to the pre-election agreement? The answer is absolutely no,” he explained.
Kitinda also raised concerns over changes in parliamentary composition due to factors such as deaths, by-elections, and electoral petitions.
“If a coalition had 50 MPs and one dies, does the number remain the same? If a court nullifies an election, does that party still hold the same strength? The reality is that political dynamics shift,” he argued.
Another contentious issue in the case was whether Wetang’ula could simultaneously serve as National Assembly Speaker and hold a party leadership.
“In the view of the Court of Appeal, there is absolutely no threat to the Speaker of the National Assembly because no decision has been taken by the High Court regarding him holding of the dual role as the Speaker of the National Assembly and a political party leader in the Kenya Kwanza alliance. The Court of Appeal said that if there is anything that then would arise, even including the would-be contempt proceedings, then those issues will be dealt with then,” Milimo clarified.
Kitinda dismissed concerns over the dual roles, arguing that the Court of Appeal had found no legal basis to challenge the Speaker’s position.
“The Court of Appeal made it clear that the High Court did not issue a final order requiring the Speaker to relinquish his role in Kenya Kwanza,” he said.
“There is absolutely no court order barring the Speaker from holding both positions. Any suggestion of contempt is legally baseless,” he affirmed.
With the Court of Appeal set to fast-track hearings on the substantive appeal, legal experts believe the ruling reinforces the Speaker’s authority while reaffirming the flexibility of coalition politics.
“We expect the Court of Appeal to provide further clarity on coalition realignments and whether the High Court’s interpretation of party composition was correct,” Kitinda concluded.
“Photography is a way of feeling, of touching, of loving. What you have caught on film is captured forever… It remembers little things, long after you have forgotten everything.”
