The long-standing wrangles within the Wiper Party over the leadership of the Majority Leader and Majority Whip positions in the Kitui County Assembly were finally resolved by the High Court in Kitui. The civil suit, presided over by Justice Robert Limo, involved Hon. Harrison Maluki (MCA for Migwani Ward) and Hon. Boniface Katula (MCA for Kanyangi Ward) as the appellants, and Hon. Munyoki Mwinzi (MCA for Kyuso Ward) and Hon. Daniel Ngoima (MCA for Township Ward) as the respondents. At the heart of the dispute was the legitimacy of the appellants’ removal from their leadership positions and the jurisdiction of the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) in handling the matter.
In his ruling, Justice Limo criticized the PPDT for assuming jurisdiction without ensuring that the appellants had exhausted internal party dispute resolution mechanisms, as mandated by Section 40(2) of the Political Parties Act. The court noted that jurisdiction must be explicitly granted by statute or the Constitution, and any tribunal acting beyond its mandate undermines the rule of law. Justice Limo also faulted the PPDT for issuing orders against the Speaker of the County Assembly, who was not named as a party in the original case, and for interfering with the internal operations of the Assembly, including matters of quorum and adherence to Standing Orders.
The judge further emphasized the doctrine of exhaustion, observing that the PPDT overstepped by taking on a matter that should have been addressed within the Wiper Party’s internal mechanisms. Justice Limo ruled that the appellants’ removal from office had been overtaken by events following elections held on September 4, 2024, where the appellants were re-elected to their positions. He clarified that this rendered the question of their removal moot, leaving the sole issue for determination as the PPDT’s jurisdiction to hear the initial complaint.
Justice Limo’s detailed analysis highlighted the legislative framework governing the PPDT, which is rooted in the Political Parties Act No. 11 of 2011. He noted that the tribunal’s role is primarily to handle disputes related to the registration, regulation, and funding of political parties, as well as connected matters. By intervening in a matter outside its prescribed jurisdiction, the PPDT had acted in error, and its judgment was set aside. The respondents were ordered to pay the legal costs incurred by the appellants.
The High Court’s ruling reaffirmed the importance of adhering to procedural and legal guidelines in resolving political disputes. It underscored the need for political parties to utilize internal dispute mechanisms before escalating cases to external bodies. The judgment also serves as a reminder that tribunals and courts must strictly adhere to their defined mandates to maintain the integrity of the legal process. For the Wiper Party, this ruling provides an opportunity to refocus on unity and governance, leaving behind the contentious leadership struggles that had marred its operations in Kitui county.
Ends///
