Kenyan politicians have received major relief after the High Court ruled that an elected leader can only be removed from office for party hopping if there is clear proof that they formally resigned from the party that sponsored them to office.
A three-judge bench made the ruling while dismissing a petition seeking to oust Isiolo Governor Abdi Guyo and his deputy John Lowasa. The petitioners had accused the two of abandoning the Jubilee Party and joining the United Democratic Alliance (UDA).
Court: Political behaviour is not the same as legal defection
The judges clarified that simply appearing with another party, attending its events, or being politically aligned with it does not amount to legal defection.
They explained that a defection is only valid if it follows the strict steps laid out in Sections 10 and 11 of the Political Parties Act, which include:
Writing a formal resignation letter,
Submitting it to the political party, and
Filing the resignation with the Registrar of Political Parties.
The court noted that no such documents were presented to prove that Governor Guyo or his deputy had left Jubilee.
Role of parties vs. role of elected leaders
In its judgment, the bench emphasized that political parties are important to Kenya’s multiparty system. However, it added that governors exercise executive authority on behalf of the people, not on behalf of political parties.
Even so, the judges warned that unregulated party hopping weakens democracy and violates the principles of integrity and good governance contained in the Constitution, especially Article 10(2).
Petition lacked evidence
The petitioners — Guyo Ali, Mohammed Wario, Teddy Muturi, and Steven Kihonge — argued that the Isiolo leaders had shifted allegiance. But the court found the case was based on assumptions and political claims, not legal proof.
Governor Guyo and his deputy insisted that they had never resigned from Jubilee, calling the allegations “political speculation.”
Final ruling
The court dismissed the petition and confirmed that:
Removal of an elected leader must be based on solid evidence,
Courts cannot act on political perceptions or public opinion, and
A leader’s position cannot be taken away unless the law is fully followed and defection is clearly proven.
The decision now sets a strong precedent for all future party-hopping disputes.
