Peter Wanyama, a Legal Compliance Specialist, has weighed in on the ongoing debate surrounding the attempt to remove President William Ruto from office through a referendum.
In a statement made on X, Wanyama clarified that such a move would not be legally viable, as it lacks constitutional backing.
He explained that the Constitution outlines a specific framework for governance that must be followed at all times and that any government established outside of this framework is considered unlawful.
“I know some of us are politically agitated and want the government to be more responsible. But I have seen folks, including some lawyers a pushing the idea that the President can be removed from office through a people-driven referendum,” he explained.
“My express and unequivocal advice is that this push won’t succeed because it is NOT supported by the Constitution. It is not lawful.”
Grounds For When a Presidency Can Become Vacant
Wanyama highlighted that there is no provision in the 2010 Constitution that allows for the President to be removed via a referendum.
“There is no mechanism, procedure or provisions in the 2010 Constitution that provides for this initiative,” said the lawyer.
Also Read: Details of the Case Filed to Remove Ruto & Gachagua from Office
He also asserted that the High Court cannot interpret the Constitution in a way that introduces provisions that do not exist or that contradicts established clauses.
“Moreover, I don’t know a rule of Constitutional interpretation that allows the High Court to read into the Constitution provisions that are not there, or provisions that are contrary to the established clauses.”
Additionally, he pointed out that the only circumstances under which the position of the President can become vacant are death, resignation, or impeachment and in such cases, the Constitution provided a clear process for political succession.
“The position of President can be vacant only through death, resignation, or impeachment. When this happens, the Constitution has provided a clear framework for political succession that culminates to a fresh election only when there is a vacancy in the office of President and Deputy President.”
Referendum Removing Ruto & Gachagua from Office
His comments come in response to a group of 14 petitioners who have filed a lawsuit in the Milimani High Court, seeking a referendum to oust Ruto and Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.
These petitioners, including members of the Kenya Bora Tuitakayo Citizens Union and various other activists, allege that the two leaders have violated the Constitution and failed to maintain public trust.
In the court document seen by The Kenya Times, the petitioners noted that the two leaders lack good faith needed to address the grievances of members of the gen z generation.
Also Read: Research Shows Percentage of Gen Zs Pushing for Ruto’s Resignation
They highlighted that this was manifested in the re-appointment of members of the dismissed cabinet and the implementation of increased fuel levy by the Kenya Roads Board despite its public withdrawal by former Transport Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen.
“Little wonder that the protesters claim they have lost faith in the Presidency William Ruto and Rigathi Gachagua hence their mantra and cry “Ruto Must Go!” This clamor is popular among the broadest cross-section of Kenyans,”
“An order of mandatory injunction be issued to compel the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to conduct a referendum to determine whether the tenure of President and Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya should be terminated on account of gross violation of the Constitution, abuse of power, incompetent governance and irreversible loss of public trust and legitimacy,” read the petition.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel for real-time news updates.
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaB3k54HltYFiQ1f2i2C
