The governor, who survived a similar plot to oust him last year, will face the Senate plenary starting Wednesday.
Dr Mutai has retained the services of Katwa Kigen, President William Ruto's long-term lawyer, to lead his defence.
Through Katwa & Kemboy Advocates, the first-term governor will have at least six advocates to challenge the county assembly's case.
Lawyer Katwa Kigen at a past event.
Photo credit: File | Nation
These are Peter Wanyama, Rose Thiong'o, Doris Ng'eno, Joash Mitei and Evanson Kirui.
In contrast, the county assembly has assembled a team of 12 advocates led by Elisha Ongoya, a lawyer with extensive experience in impeachment cases.
The MCAs have also enlisted the services of Elias Mutuma, Sharon Mibei (deputy county assembly clerk), Kimutai Bossek, Hillary Kiplangat, Brian Langat, Geoffrey Langat, Victor Kibet, Evans Kiplangat, Elvis Kipkorir, Joel Wakhungu and Vincent Kiprono, all of whom are from H&K Advocates.
Governor Mutai was impeached on August 15, 2025, after 33 out of 47 MCAs voted to impeach the former university lecturer. The impeachment motion was initiated by Kiprotich Rogony, the MCA for Sigowet Ward.
Facing a second impeachment within a year, the former university lecturer has been accused of abusing his office, making skewed, irregular and illegal appointments, sacking senior officers and practising nepotism in appointments.
The county chief has allegedly presided over the misappropriation of public funds, made double payments to contractors and flouted the Public Finance Management Act, the Constitution and the County Governments Act.
However, the governor is relying on a preliminary objection in an attempt to avoid the humiliation of being removed from office less than three years into his first term.
Dr Mutai is seeking to prevent his impeachment hearing from proceeding to a full trial on the basis that the Kericho County Assembly did not meet the two-thirds threshold required to remove a governor from office.
He contends that the assembly did not once again achieve the required number of votes when they impeached him two weeks ago.
According to the governor, he has the support of 18 MCAs, so there is no way the county assembly could have secured more than 32 votes out of a total of 47 MCAs.
On 15 August 2025, the MCAs voted electronically, returning a verdict of 33 in support of the removal Governor Mutai from office by impeachment.
However, through his lawyer, Kigen, the county chief is contesting the verdict, with 18 MCAs signing an affidavit opposing the outcome.
Last October, a preliminary objection by the governor’s lawyer, Kigen, regarding whether the Kericho County Assembly had met the required two-thirds threshold to remove a governor by impeachment, cut short a planned two-day impeachment trial.
Led by Naaman Rop, the MCAs argue that they did not participate in the electronic vote, so there is no way the total could have reached 33.
Mr Rop, who signed the affidavit on behalf of his colleagues, claims that the result of the vote is false, as 18 of the 47 MCAs did not vote in support of the petition.
“In the situation, the maximum voting MCAs, regardless of whether they voted for or against the impeachment, are a maximum of 29 MCAs/votes,” said Mr Rop.
“The purport that there were 33 votes in favour of impeachment is a result of the 1st Respondent’s fraud, scheme, and design to ensure the impeachment was passed, however, unlawfully,” he added.
Kericho Governor Erick Mutai is fighting to save his political career three years after a landslide victory in the 2022 General Election.
Photo credit: Pool
The MCAs now want the names of those who voted in favour of the impeachment to be revealed, as well as the exact timings at which the votes were cast and activity details showing that the numbers to which the usernames and links were sent reacted or responded by voting for all 33 votes.
They also argue that the voting gadgets, software applications and hardware were not end-to-end encrypted, and that the assembly installed algorithms to reflect 33 ‘yes’ votes. They add that the systems were already configured and pre-programmed to start counting at six votes.
The dissenting MCAs contend that the votes were fixed and rigged from the outset to reflect 33 ‘yes’ votes in support of impeachment, regardless of the votes cast, whether ‘yes’, ‘no’ or ‘abstain’, and regardless of who voted or whether votes were cast.
"There was no gadget upon which we, the MCAs, could press any button for 'yes', 'no' or 'abstain' as we were being invited by the Speaker," reads the affidavit.
The MCAs argue that publishing the username, which was the MCAs' payroll numbers, and the identity card number used as a password during the election made it easy for anyone working with or associated with the County Assembly to vote.
They have demanded all details on the process, procedure and infrastructure for the challenged electronic voting, but to no avail.
"With these username and password details, anyone could cast votes, and indeed some people who were not MCAs stepped in to do so. This made it easy for third parties to intercept, manipulate and vote, thereby altering the wishes and votes of us/MCAs. This state of affairs was planned and schemed by the assembly and the speaker,’ the affidavit stated.
This is the second time that Governor Mutai has faced senators in under three years since he was sworn into office in 2022.
On October 2, 2024, 31 MCAs voted to impeach Dr Mutai. However, 12 days later, the Senate overturned the assembly’s resolution, giving the county chief a political lifeline.
The governor survived imminent removal from office on a technicality, before the impeachment trial could even begin.
This was after a majority of senators voted to terminate the impeachment trial on the basis that the Kericho County Assembly had failed to meet the two-thirds threshold required to impeach a governor by a single MCA.
