By Anchor Writer
Machakos, September 18, 2025 — The High Court in Machakos today upheld a preliminary objection filed by Speaker Anne Kiusya and former clerk Kelvin Mutui, ruling that fourteen suspended Members of the County Assembly (MCAs) prematurely rushed to court without first exhausting internal dispute mechanisms.
The ruling effectively dismissed their petitions but ordered that they be allowed back into the Assembly, claiming that their 28-day suspension had lapsed.
Lady Justice Noel Adagi, sitting virtually, delivered the ruling in consolidated Petitions E018 and E024 of 2025, which had been filed by a bloc of MCAs aligned to Governor Wavinya Ndeti.
The legislators had sought conservatory orders stopping their suspension and barring the Speaker from taking retaliatory measures against them after they initiated a motion to oust her from office.
In her 15-page decision, Justice Adagi noted that Standing Order 106A of the Machakos County Assembly provides a clear appeal process to the Powers and Privileges Committee for any member suspended from the House.
She ruled that the petitioners had not demonstrated that this mechanism was unavailable or ineffective and, therefore, the doctrine of exhaustion applied.
Quoting the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, the judge underscored that parties must honour statutory and internal dispute-resolution forums before seeking constitutional relief. “Having fully considered the dispute disclosed in the Petitioners’ consolidated applications herein and the County Assembly of Machakos Standing Order 106A, I am clear in my mind that the mechanism established under the said Standing Order can afford the Petitioners an effective remedy,” the judge said.
However, Justice Adagi also found that the 28-sitting-day suspension imposed by Speaker Kiusya on June 10 had already lapsed and therefore directed that the 14 MCAs “be forthwith allowed to attend and participate in the official sittings of the County Assembly of Machakos unless they are otherwise lawfully barred and while so attending they are expected to maintain law and order”.
The ruling does not explain how the Court computed the 28 “sitting days,” which are distinct from calendar days under Assembly Standing Orders. Questions linger as to whether the Assembly’s official sitting calendar, Hansard records, or attendance logs were produced in court to substantiate this calculation.
If recess days were included or excluded inconsistently, the lapse date could be earlier or later than September 18,2026 — a technicality that could affect whether the MCAs are lawfully reinstated or still technically suspended.
This point could form a future ground of appeal or review if either side feels aggrieved.
The dispute arose after chaos erupted in the assembly chambers when the speaker attempted to deliver an official communication. The petitioners allegedly rushed toward the Speaker’s dais and tried to seize the Mace.
The Speaker accused them of gross misconduct and suspended them for 28 sitting days under Standing Orders 103–106.
The MCAs contended that the suspensions were retaliatory and aimed at frustrating their push to remove the Speaker.
They claimed they were denied due process and locked out of their constitutional roles without notice, hearing, or lawful procedure.
Today’s ruling marks a pivotal moment in the long-running feud between Governor Wavinya’s allies and the Assembly leadership. While the court backed the Speaker on the procedure, it simultaneously opened the door for the MCAs’ return — restoring the numbers they need to influence Assembly business.
Only time will tell if the affected MCAs will deploy lawlessness going forward in a chamber they were elected to make laws.
Stay Anchored www.theanchormedia.org
