The Meru High Court has stopped local MCAs from proceeding with the fourth impeachment motion against Governor Kawira Mwangaza, which was to be debated on Thursday, July 25.
Justice Linus Phogon Kassan said the court would issue directions on Monday, July, 29 after going through the responses of all the opposing parties to ensure a fair process.
In a ruling on Wednesday evening, the judge said the MCAs would not suffer any prejudice following the temporary adjournment.
Ms Mwangaza had rushed to court to stop the MCAs from proceeding with the planned impeachment motion against her.
Through lawyers Elias Mutuma and Ashaba Mark, the governor claims the impeachment motion is flawed and driven by malice from her political detractors.
She alleges that the MCAs have been whipped along political lines to impeach her in order to settle political scores with her opponents.
Justice Kassan noted that this was the fourth planned impeachment motion against Ms Mwangaza, with the other three attempts failing, and that it was in the public interest to be thorough.
He said it was in the public interest that the petition be determined at this stage to avoid waste of resources and judicial time and to ensure peaceful co-existence.
The judge highlighted some of the issues he would seek to address in his ruling, including allegations of forgery of signatures of some MCAs in papers supporting the impeachment motion.
Ms Mwangaza alleges that some MCAs who supported her were listed as having appended their signatures in support of the motion. She claimed that their signatures were forged.
Justice Kassan said the court was also keen to ensure that Ms Mwangaza does not suffer double jeopardy by being prosecuted on issues raised in previous impeachment motions.
The court said it would also rule on whether a section of the MCAs could be enjoined as interested parties in the suit, check for breach of the right to a fair hearing and scrutinise the allegations of sub judice.
Ms Mwangaza claimed that two of the grounds relied on by the MCAs were subject to active criminal and civil cases and would therefore be prejudicial to their outcome.
Mr Kassan said the court had jurisdiction to hear the matter but explained that the Judiciary did not intend to offend the principle of separation of powers.
“The High Court is clothed with the authority to oversee faithfulness and submission to the constitution by anybody, any juristic person in order to avert chaos and anarchy.
“There are many decisions that the High Court has ruled against other arms of government including the President,” he ruled.
The ruling will be delivered Monday, 29, 2024.
