Give Kenyans power to fire Ruto, petitioners ask court

President William Ruto put up a spirited fight on Monday to have a case filed to impeach him through a referendum thrown out.

In his objection, his lawyer, Fred Ngatia, argued that Dr Ruto enjoyed immunity from criminal or civil cases until the end of his tenure.

Ngatia argued that the case filed by a group of 14 human rights activists and lawyers led by Cyprian Nyamwamu and Khelef Khalifa was leading the court to uncharted waters.

"I request you to hold and find this was a dangerous pass time. They had a day in court, and it should come to an end,” argued Ngatia.

On the other hand, Kibe Mungai said that the case was about to hold the president to account for runaway corruption, plunder of government resources, oppressive taxation, and extrajudicial killings of anti-government protesters over the high cost of living.

According to Kibe, the power to elect the people can be exercised through a referendum, including kicking out a president.

According to the lawyer, the case was not about removing Dr Ruto through the Judiciary, and his clients sought affirmation that he had violated the law 31 times. 

In Kibe's view, Parliament had become an appendage of the presidency and puppets, hence, it could not oversee or bring to question the Head of State through an impeachment.

He stated that Gen-Z protests were a clear demonstration that Kenyans are the employers and have a right to fire a president through other means than a coup.

"Today, we are on a minor event. The petitioners are not seeking the president's removal through a judicial process. Instead, the people are asking the court to make a finding that on these 30 or so constitutional violations, the president has violated the Constitution. Is it the court's business to declare that one has violated the constitution? Yes.

“Will the High Court remove the president? No? If there is a violation, then the matter must be placed in a referendum for the people to decide whether he will remain in office. It is the people of Kenya and not the court who will decide,” argued Kibe.

According to Kibe, sovereignty is exercised by electing the president and MPs directly and donating power to judges and magistrates. He said that although there are instances and structures of removing each one of them, the power to fire each belonged to the people and could be exercised directly.

He stressed that Kenyans were seeking a civilized way of getting Dr. Ruto out of office.

"Although there are laws in Africa providing powers of the impeachment, it is impossible and hot air because the president has captured Parliament; it is his tool. We talk of Gen-Z and we think we can exercise power in a good manner. In West Africa, the president captured parliament and was overthrown by the military.  Can Kenyans be stopped from removing a president who has gone rogue? No, they cannot be stopped,” argued Kibe.

At the same time, he said the president could be sued in person in an impeachment case. According to him, the Attorney General (AG) cannot represent the president in such a case as the AG’s role is to defend the government and the people.

"The AG must decide are we going to be on the side of the president or we are going to be on the side of the people. It is the petitioners’ case that on the issue of the people, the AG is disqualified from appearing on behalf of the president,” argued Kibe.

Initially, the group had sued Ruto and Rigathi Gachagua, the ousted deputy president.

The petitioners are asking court to compel the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to conduct a referendum to determine whether the people will fire Dr Ruto or not. 

“President has run the government in a manner that has interfered with the management of health, markets, land rates, livestock, cows and chickens,” the petitioners say.