A fresh wave of confusion has hit Isiolo County following claims that
Governor Abdi Guyo was impeached on Thursday, even as top officials at the
County Assembly issued conflicting statements on whether a sitting to remove
the governor took place.
In a statement widely circulated on social media
and attributed to the Isiolo County Assembly, it was claimed that 16 out of 18
Members of County Assembly (MCAs) voted in favour of the governor’s
impeachment.
The statement noted that two members were absent, and no votes were cast
against the motion.
“The House proceeded with the matter in
accordance with Standing Orders and relevant legal provisions after the
governor failed to appear,” read part of the statement.
It further added that Governor Guyo had been formally invited to defend
himself but did not show up.
According to the statement, the process
followed weeks of public participation and debate in all ten wards, and the
resolution will now be forwarded to the Senate as required under Article 181 of
the Constitution and Section 33 of the County Governments Act.
But in a sharp rebuttal, County Assembly Clerk
Salad Boru dismissed the reports as misleading and denied that any sitting to
deliberate on the governor’s removal was convened by his office.
“We categorically deny and clarify the
misleading reports circulating in the media and on social platforms. No sitting
was convened or facilitated by the Office of the Clerk to discuss or conduct
any impeachment proceedings against the Governor,” said Boru.
He emphasised that there are active court
orders barring the Assembly from proceeding with the impeachment and that the
Assembly remains bound by those directives.
“The County Assembly is fully committed to
upholding the rule of law and will not act in violation of any court order,”
Boru said.
He also stated that his office had
not issued any order papers, notices, or instructions to facilitate such a
sitting, formal or informal.
Boru further noted that he remains the lawful
and substantive Clerk of the Assembly after a court ruling halted his
suspension.
“Anyone purporting to act as Clerk
has no legal mandate to facilitate or preside over any business of the
Assembly,” he added.
Governor Guyo, in a phone interview with The Star, expressed disbelief at the
developments and maintained that no invitation had been sent to him to respond
to any allegations.
“I am shocked. They have never invited me to
explain anything. We have a court order which has not been vacated or
challenged,” he said.
The disagreement has thrown the county into
political uncertainty, with both sides holding firm positions.
While the Assembly insists the process was conducted lawfully, the Clerk and
the governor argue it was null and void due to the existing court injunction.
As
the matter now awaits possible consideration by the Senate, legal clarity may
be required to determine the validity of the proceedings, especially in light
of the conflicting positions within the County Assembly itself.
