Kenya's Senate has issued a stark warning against the growing misuse of impeachment powers by County Assemblies, a trend senators argue has devolved into political theatrics that threaten the core of devolution. What was designed as a crucial accountability tool is now being flagged as a weapon for settling political scores and paralyzing county governments.

This isn't just political noise; it has tangible consequences for every Kenyan. The constant political battles stall development projects, divert funds to costly legal battles, and erode public trust in county leadership. The focus shifts from service delivery—fixing roads, stocking hospitals, and providing water—to political survival, leaving citizens short-changed.

A Pattern of Political Pressure

The process for removing a governor is clearly outlined in the Constitution and the County Governments Act, requiring a motion supported by at least two-thirds of MCAs before the matter proceeds to the Senate for investigation. However, this constitutional safeguard is increasingly being exploited. Recent events in Nyamira County underscore this concern, where an impeachment attempt against Governor Amos Nyaribo collapsed at the Senate after it was determined the assembly failed to meet the required voting threshold.

The Nyamira case became even more contentious when three MCAs filed a police report alleging their signatures were forged to meet the numbers needed to oust the governor, adding a criminal dimension to the political drama. This incident highlights a disturbing trend where procedural rules are allegedly bent to achieve political ends.

The High Cost of Ouster 'Drama'

The financial and social costs of these protracted impeachment battles are immense. While specific figures for each impeachment are not centrally compiled, the process involves significant legal fees for both the county assembly and the governor's office, all paid from public coffers. This is money that could be used for development.

The history of impeachments in Kenya shows a mixed but disruptive pattern:

• Mike Sonko (Nairobi): Removed from office in December 2020 on charges of gross violation of the Constitution, abuse of office, and crimes under national law, a decision upheld by the Senate.
• Kawira Mwangaza (Meru): Survived two impeachment attempts before being removed by the Senate in August 2024, a decision later affirmed by the High Court in March 2025. One MCA starkly warned, "We will impeach the governor as many times until the Governor embraces good, transparent, accountable governance."
• Ferdinand Waititu (Kiambu): Impeached by the Senate in January 2020 for charges including crimes under national law and abuse of office.

While some impeachments are based on substantiated claims of misconduct, analysts note that the ambiguous threshold for what constitutes "gross misconduct" has given MCAs excessive leverage, sometimes used for political extortion.

Senate's Role as the Final Arbiter

The Senate stands as the final, quasi-judicial body in the impeachment process, tasked with impartially investigating the charges. Senators have the power to either form a special committee or have the entire plenary hear the case. However, the recent dismissal of the Nyamira case on a technicality has sparked debate within the Senate itself, with some senators arguing that such dismissals prevent a full investigation into the substantive issues affecting the county.

As the guardian of devolution, the Senate's challenge is to differentiate legitimate oversight from political witch-hunts. The recent trend has prompted calls for a review of the legislative framework to introduce a higher, more rigorous threshold for impeachments, ensuring the process is used as intended: a last resort to uphold public integrity, not the first move in a political chess game.