National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula and Senate Speaker Amason Kingi have opposed an application seeking conservatory orders to bar them from engaging in political activities, arguing that the petition is politically motivated, premature and filed before the wrong forum.
Appearing before High Court Judge David Mburu, lawyers representing the two Speakers urged the court to dismiss the application, maintaining that the petitioners failed to exhaust alternative dispute resolution mechanisms before moving to court.
Lawyer Benson Milimo confirmed that Wetang’ula harbours ambitions of becoming Kenya’s sixth president, insisting that such aspirations are protected by the Constitution.
“For the record, I confirm, yes. Hon. Moses Masika Wetang’ula has those aspirations,” Milimo told the court. “As a lawyer, I will be the happiest person to see a lawyer leading this country as president.” Milimo argued that the petition seeks to curtail the political ambitions of a Kenyan citizen and is more political than constitutional in nature.
He further dismissed claims that Wetang’ula had been sued in his personal capacity, saying the petition itself identifies him as the Speaker of the National Assembly under Article 106 of the Constitution. He maintained that the Clerk of the National Assembly was therefore properly authorised to swear the replying affidavit on behalf of the Speaker. He also argued that the petition is barred by the doctrines of res judicata and sub judice, saying similar questions have already been determined by the High Court and are the subject of six pending appeals before the Court of Appeal.
“The best course is for this court to await the determination of the Court of Appeal. A contrary finding would create an embarrassing conflict with the appellate court,” he said.
The respondents also challenged the admissibility of evidence relied upon by the petitioners, asking the court to expunge media reports, screenshots and other annexures, arguing that they cannot form the basis for granting conservatory orders. He maintained that Wetang’ula and Kingi are elected state officers who became Speakers through an election process and therefore enjoy the political rights guaranteed under Article 38 of the Constitution.
Milimo submitted that Wetang’ula’s leadership of Ford Kenya and his political ambitions do not violate the Constitution.
“If it did not matter whether one is elected or appointed, why has this petition not been filed against Members of Parliament, the President, Members of County Assembly or Speakers of County Assemblies?” he posed.
He also faulted the petition for relying on provisions of the repealed Public Officer Ethics Act, arguing that it cannot sustain the constitutional challenge. Opposing the conservatory orders, Milimo argued that the petitioners had failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate any imminent harm.
“There is nothing urgent to preserve. This is pure politics. The orders sought are intended to gag the Speakers from engaging with the public and expressing their political views,” he told the court.
He added that declining the conservatory orders would not render the petition nugatory because the substantive issues can still be determined at the hearing.
Lawyer Ian Mutiso argued that Wetang’ula and Kingi have openly participated in political campaigns, conduct he said undermines the constitutional principles of separation of powers, leadership and integrity. Mutiso submitted that the petition raises fundamental constitutional questions on whether the Speakers of the National Assembly and the Senate are required to remain politically neutral while holding office. He urged the court to preserve constitutional governance by maintaining the conservatory orders pending the hearing and determination of the petition.
Mutiso also cited guidance issued by the Commission on Administrative Justice on political neutrality among public office holders, arguing that if the two Speakers wish to actively engage in partisan politics, they should first resign from office.
Lawyer Abner Mango also opposed the respondents’ application, arguing that the conservatory orders are directed at the office holders personally and must be obeyed unless set aside by the court.
He submitted that the offices of Speaker of the National Assembly and Speaker of the Senate wield immense constitutional authority and that active participation in partisan politics threatens the doctrine of separation of powers. Justice David Mburu is expected to give a ruling on July 23, 2026.
