The ruling by Senate speaker Amason Kingi declaring that parliament cannot be subjected to injunctions now means that the impeachment trial of Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua will proceed as planned whether a court issues a ruling stopping it or not.
Gachagua is banking on the courts to save him from the looming impeachment.
At least 26 petitions have been filed in various courts seeking to stop the impeachment process.
On Monday, Chief Justice Martha Koome constituted a three-judge bench to hear and determine the cases challenging the impeachment process.
The bench consists of Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima and Freda Mugambi. The National Assembly voted last Tuesday to impeach him.
While delivering a ruling Monday regarding a preliminary objection raised by Governor Eric Mutai on his impeachment, Kingi asserted that parliament cannot be prevented from discharging its constitutional functions by dint of a court order.
“Whether or not there was in fact a Court Order in this matter does not matter, nothing turns on it, the result is the same; which is that Parliament cannot be prevented from the discharge of its constitutional functions by dint of an order of court,” he said.
His decision comes amidst a highly anticipated ruling by a High Court in Nairobi Tuesday on whether it will suspend the impeachment trial of the DP.
Senate is set to conduct the trial on Wednesday and Thursday before the final vote.
In pronouncing himself on the matter, Kingi based his arguments on various precedents set by the ex-speaker Kenneth Marende and the then-deputy speaker Kithure Kindiki.
In separate communications before the House, the two emphasised the respect for the separation of powers between the arms of government.
According to the speaker, Kindiki observed that an injunction by the Court against Parliament is a frontal and deadly attack on the substratum and hallowed legal doctrine of separation of powers, the bedrock of our Constitution.
“Separation of powers creates separate and distinct arms of government with equal but different powers,” he quoted.
Kindiki further recognised that curtailing Parliament’s constitutional responsibilities undermines the sui generis nature of Parliament.
He went on to state that attempts to injunct Parliament are inimical to the desired levels of institutional comity and cordial relations among other branches of government.
His communication was with respect to the impeachment of the then-Taita Taveta Governor.
Kingi also cited the supreme court ruling in Petition No. 32 of 2014; Justus Kariuki Mate & Another v Martin Nyaga Wambora & Another of 2017.
In this case, according to Kingi, the High Court had issued conservatory orders to prevent the impeachment of the governor.
It also held that each arm of government has an obligation to recognise the independence of other arms of Government, said Kingi.
“Each arm of government is under the duty to refrain from directing another arm on how to exercise its mandate,” it states.
Kingi also cited a recent court of appeal ruling in a civil case against Meru Governor Kawira Mwangaza versus County Assembly of Meru and others.
The court of appeal, Kingi stated, affirmed that the courts cannot, in the first instance, intervene in the impeachment of the applicant.
This is because of the strict timelines provided by the law.