Why Azimio dropped case against Wetang'ula over Sabina Chege's Jubilee position

This follows a recent ruling by Justices Jamila Mohamed, Fred Ochieng, and Mumbi Ngugi, who unanimously declined to lift orders reinstating Kioni, Kagwe Gichohi, and David Murathe as Jubilee Party leaders.

The Court of Appeal judges ruled that Joshua Kutuny and Kega, representing the party’s national disciplinary committee, had failed to convince the court why the trio should not be at the party’s helm.

The bench, headed by Justice Jamila Mohamed, stated that there was no evidence showing which Jubilee activities would be disrupted.

They noted that Kioni, Gichohi, and Murathe’s lawyer, Jackson Awele, had demonstrated that there were legal remedies available should his clients breach the party’s constitution. However, the judges acknowledged that there was an arguable appeal.

“We did not hear from any of the first applicant’s counsel on the specific activities they claim will be disrupted if we do not grant the stay in the interim pending determination of the intended appeal. The first to third respondents (Kioni, Gichohi, and Murathe) will resume their lawful positions in the party. As pointed out by Mr Awele in his rebuttal, if the first to third respondents were to act beyond what they are permitted to do under the party’s constitution, there is a legal recourse. In the circumstances, the applicants have failed to satisfy the second limb of Rule 5(2) (b) of this court’s rules,” the bench ruled.

At the High Court, Azimio had argued that after stripping Sabina of her deputy minority whip position, Wetang’ula announced that she would take up Jubilee Party’s whip position on an interim basis.

However, in its case filed by lawyer Paul Mwangi, the opposition coalition contended that it was unfair and illegal for Sabina to be granted an office while all other constituent parties were left without deputy whips.

Mwangi accused Wetang’ula of continuously placing obstacles against efforts to remove Sabina from both Jubilee and Azimio leadership.

He argued that the National Assembly had initially refused to sanction her removal until Azimio followed due process. However, according to Mwangi, the Speaker later changed his stance, claiming that he had received communication from Jubilee’s breakaway faction requesting recognition as a parliamentary party.

The Speaker then informed Azimio that a pending court case required the House to wait for its outcome. The High Court later dismissed the case.

Following the dismissal, Azimio communicated its resolution to Wetang’ula, seeking to remove Chege.

On 25 October 2023, Jubilee wrote to Wetang’ula, indicating that they had removed Chege as minority deputy chief and party leader.

Mwangi claimed that Wetang’ula had overstepped his authority by interfering with political parties’ rights to choose their leaders. He further alleged that the Speaker’s actions were intended to weaken Azimio.

“The petitioner states that the respondent’s action of recognising Jubilee Party as a parliamentary party while it remains part of the petitioner’s coalition is a personal decision, unconstitutional, ill-intentioned, and aimed at causing divisions within the petitioner’s coalition,” argued Mwangi.

Leadership disputes within former President Uhuru Kenyatta’s party continue to persist.

Two weeks ago, the High Court barred a lawyer who claimed he had been sent to represent Jubilee by the Chege and Kanini Kega faction.

This ruling came after Ndegwa Njiru, representing the Jeremiah Kioni faction, presented court orders affirming that the former MP and David Murathe remained the legitimate Jubilee Party leaders.

It is not the first time Azimio has clashed with Chege and the National Assembly over her removal.

In court, Wycliffe Oparanya testified that Chege’s faction had written to withdraw from Azimio. However, he stated that Kioni’s faction maintained that Jubilee was still part of the coalition.

According to Oparanya, the issue could only be resolved through a national delegates conference.

“To the best of my knowledge, no such conference has been held. For that reason, Jubilee Party has never withdrawn from being a member of the Azimio la Umoja Coalition,” said Oparanya.

He further argued that Jubilee could not be both a parliamentary party and a member of Azimio simultaneously.

“This would amount to undermining the coalition agreement between the parties. The Speaker of the National Assembly acted contrary to the Constitution of Kenya 2010 by declaring that Jubilee Party is a parliamentary party while it remains part of the petitioner’s coalition,” Oparanya asserted.

Meanwhile, Azimio listed Jubilee as an interested party in the case.