Kibwezi West MP Mwengi Mutuse found himself under intense scrutiny on Wednesday in the Senate as he struggled to defend his impeachment motion against Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.
In what felt like a student entering an exam room with answers but lacking the formulas, Mr Mutuse struggled to respond to questions posed by Elisha Ongoya, Gachagua’s legal counsel, during a cross-examination aimed at dismantling the MP’s case against the Deputy President.
Mr Ongoya’s line of questioning focused on several allegations against Mr Gachagua, including the claim that the Deputy President had publicly undermined government policy concerning the controversial relocation of traders from Wakulima Market and the demolition of structures near riparian lands.
His strategy was clear: he sought to expose cracks in Mr Mutuse’s assertions.
The lawyer presented video clips of Mr Gachagua calling for humane treatment of citizens, asking pointedly, “The Deputy President is saying, ‘Let us not have war with Wananchi.’ Do you find anything offensive in that statement?” The question lingered in the air, and Mutuse, visibly uneasy, replied that he saw no offense in the words themselves—only in the context in which they were delivered.
“It was inappropriate for him to voice his dissent at a press conference,” Mr Mutuse said, adding that such matters should be raised in Cabinet meetings.
Mr Ongoya pressed him further, “Do you have anything wrong with that call?” Mr Mutuse reiterated his concern, saying, “I have a problem with the forum…”
As the cross-examination continued, Mr Ongoya skilfully navigated the intricate legal landscape surrounding constitutional principles. He probed Mr Mutuse about Mr Gachagua’s appeal for public participation in the relocation process.
“The Deputy President is saying, ‘Let’s have an engagement.’ That is consistent with the constitutional principle of public participation, true or not true?” he asked. Mutuse’s response was careful, revealing his struggle to maintain a consistent argument: “Well, that’s you saying so.”
The atmosphere grew increasingly tense as Mr Ongoya continued his assault. “Which part of this statement calling for empathy violates a policy decision of Cabinet?” he demanded. In a moment of hesitation, Mr Mutuse faltered, saying, “The Deputy President was in Cabinet; he is the one better placed to tell us.”
On several occasions, senators quietly following the proceedings were seen exchanging glances and smiling in disbelief, their reactions showing a shared sense of shock at the unfolding drama.
At the close of the session, Murang’a Senator Joe Nyutu questioned whether Mr Mutuse was genuinely the originator of the motion, pointing to his inability to adequately respond during the intense questioning.
“Hon. Mutuse does not give convincing reasons, in my view, because every time he is asked a question, he says, ‘I think so,’ or ‘I believe so.’ He does not give convincing reasons,” he said.
The trial proceedings continue today at the Senate, with senators expected to cast their votes in the evening to either uphold or reject the impeachment of the Deputy President.
Email your news TIPS to Editor@nairobilawmonthly.com, and to advertise with us, call +254715061658 anytime of the day
