Court blocks Wetang'ula from suspending MP Wamboka as PIC Chair

Bumula MP Jack Wanami Wamboka got a major reprieve after the High Court halted the National Assembly Speaker’s decision to suspend him from chairing the Public Investments Committee on Governance and Education over bribery allegations.

In a ruling delivered on Monday, May 11, 2026, Justice Gregory Mutai found that Wamboka was denied a fair hearing before the disciplinary action was taken against him, a finding that raised serious constitutional red flags over the Speaker's April 22, 2026 decision.

"Consequently, I order that pending the hearing and determination of the substantive petition, a conservatory order is hereby issued suspending the position of the Speaker of the National Assembly of April 22, 2026, suspending the petitioner as the chairperson of the Public Investment Committee on Governance and Education during the pendency of the inquiry by the Committee of Powers and Privileges," Justice Mutai ruled.

The court ruled that the disciplinary process leading to Wamboka’s suspension did not meet the threshold of fair administrative action as guaranteed under the Constitution.

Justice Mutai observed that the petitioner had demonstrated that he was not accorded procedural fairness before the drastic action was taken against him and indeed the legislator has raised an arguable case on alleged violations of his constitutional rights, including lack of a fair hearing.  

“The petitioner appears not to have been heard, nor was the fair administrative action followed, and in my view the petitioner has demonstrated that he has a prima facie case that has a probability of success,” the judge ruled.

The decision effectively blocks the National Assembly from implementing the suspension pending the full hearing and determination of the petition.

Wamboka, represented by lawyer Nelson Havi, had sought the court's intervention, arguing that his suspension was unconstitutional, unlawful, and issued without due process, including lack of a hearing or formal notice of charges.  

The National Assembly, through its legal team, had asked the court to throw out the case at the outset, raising a five-ground preliminary objection challenging the court's jurisdiction to interfere with Parliament's internal processes.

The National Assembly Speaker argued that the matter fell exclusively within parliamentary mandate and should be struck out.

However, the judge dismissed the objection, emphasizing that courts retain authority to intervene where constitutional violations are alleged.

“Jurisdiction is everything. Without it, a court has no power to make one statement… where a court has no jurisdiction, there will be no basis for continuation of proceedings,” Justice Mutai said.

He further rejected arguments grounded on the doctrine of separation of powers, making it clear that the judiciary cannot abdicate its constitutional duty.

“With respect, for this court to disavow jurisdiction on the grounds of separation of powers would be nothing short of dereliction of its constitutional mandate. This court won’t do anything of the sort.”

On the question of whether the dispute was premature, the court found that the matter had already crystallised, noting that Wamboka was actively serving a 45-day suspension at the time of filing the petition.

“In my view, the petitioner has already been suspended and is now serving 45 days suspension… what is before the court is what has already happened,” the judge noted.

The court also addressed the issue of exhaustion of internal parliamentary mechanisms, ruling that alleged violations of fundamental rights fall squarely within the High Court’s jurisdiction and cannot be left solely to parliamentary committees.

Justice Mutai further emphasised that failure to grant conservatory orders would render the petition nugatory.

“If the conservatory orders are not issued, the impugned decision will continue and be concluded, and in my view the petitioner will suffer prejudice… the substratum of the petition will be defeated.”

The court directed that the case be fast-tracked and heard within 120 days, citing the public interest and constitutional significance of the dispute.

“This is a matter raising issues of integrity of parliamentary proceedings… I order and direct that the petition shall be fast-tracked and be heard and determined within 120 days of the date hereof.”

The matter will be mentioned on June 8, 2026, for further directions on the hearing of the main petition.