Former CJ David Maraga Slams Parliament For Failure To Impeach President Ruto

Former Chief Justice David Maraga has sharply criticized the Kenyan Parliament for its perceived inaction regarding the impeachment of President William Ruto. Speaking on Citizen TV on Tuesday, July 15, Maraga argued that, given the widespread public clamour for Ruto to leave office before the 2027 General Election, Parliament should have already initiated impeachment proceedings against the Head of State.

Maraga, who has publicly stated his intention to challenge Ruto in the upcoming polls, further accused the legislative arm of government of being unduly influenced by the President. He posited that this alleged control is the primary reason why no progress has been made on ousting Ruto from office.

“Parliament has the power to impeach the President. He has violated countless provisions of the Constitution,” Maraga asserted. “If Parliament were doing its work, the President would not be in office today,” the Chief Justice Emeritus added, underscoring his belief that sufficient grounds for impeachment already exist.

Maraga reiterated that, aside from a voluntary resignation, an impeachment by Parliament remains the only other legal avenue for the President to exit office before the conclusion of his first term.

“What people are saying when they are talking about ‘Wantam’ is that President Ruto to resign. If you are not resigning Parliament, are you listening? Impeach this President and get him out,” Maraga urged, directly challenging the legislative body.

Grounds and Process of Impeachment in Kenya

In Kenya, a motion of impeachment against the President can be moved on specific grounds:

• Gross violation of a provision of the Constitution or any other law.
• Serious reasons to believe that the President has committed a crime under national or international law.
• Gross misconduct.

The impeachment process itself is a two-stage procedure involving both the National Assembly and the Senate, as meticulously outlined in Article 145 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.

A Member of the National Assembly (MP) intending to move an impeachment motion must first submit a copy of the proposed motion, clearly stating the grounds and particulars of the allegations, to the Clerk of the National Assembly. This proposed motion must then be supported by at least one-third (1/3) of all the members of the National Assembly (i.e., a minimum of 117 out of 349 members), with their signatures endorsing the motion.

Once officially submitted and approved by the Speaker, the motion proceeds to a debate, setting the stage for a pivotal vote within seven days. Should the National Assembly vote to support the impeachment motion, it must garner the endorsement of a formidable two-thirds majority of its members.

If successful, the Speaker of the National Assembly promptly informs the Speaker of the Senate, signalling the transfer of proceedings to the upper house. Crucially, during this transition period, the President retains all official functions, ensuring continuity of government until a final determination is reached.

Within seven days of receiving the National Assembly’s resolution, the Senate convenes to address the charges. The Senate has the option to appoint a special committee of eleven of its members to delve into the allegations. This committee, tasked with a thorough investigation, must report back to the full Senate within ten days, stating whether the particulars of the allegations against the President have been substantiated. Throughout this investigative phase, the President is afforded the fundamental right to appear before the committee, either in person or represented by legal counsel, to present their defence. This due process is akin to what transpired during the impeachment proceedings involving former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.