Weaponisation of Impeachment
By Ibrahim K. Minyori
Impeachment was designed as a constitutional scalpel. In practice, it has become a political machete.
Across Kenya’s counties, impeachment is no longer merely a response to misconduct. It is a tool of leverage, a bargaining chip, a warning shot. Long before charges are drafted or evidence assembled, the outcome is often shaped by alliances, vendettas, and factional math inside County Assemblies.
This is not accidental. It is engineered.
How Impeachment Became a Political Weapon
At its purest, impeachment is meant to protect the public interest. But devolution introduced a new political ecosystem: MCAs with local power, governors with budgets, and parties struggling to control both.
In that ecosystem, impeachment evolved.
MCAs discovered that the threat of impeachment can be more powerful than impeachment itself. Governors discovered that survival depends less on performance and more on managing political risk. Parties discovered impeachment as a tool for discipline — or disposal.
Thus began the weaponisation.
Step One: Manufacturing Grievance
Weaponised impeachment rarely begins with crime. It begins with falling out.
A governor reshuffles the executive.
Development funds bypass certain wards.
An MCA loses committee privileges.
Grievances that would once have been political disputes are reframed as constitutional violations. Language escalates. What was “unfair” becomes “illegal.” What was “bad leadership” becomes “gross misconduct.”
By the time a motion appears on the Order Paper, the narrative is already primed.
Step Two: Party Signals and National Calculus
County Assemblies do not operate in isolation. Party headquarters matter.
A governor who defies party leadership, flirts with rival coalitions, or becomes electorally inconvenient quickly loses insulation. Impeachment becomes a signal to others — comply or face consequences.
This is why some governors with thin allegations fall quickly, while others with serious accusations remain untouched. The difference is rarely ethics. It is political value.
When the party withdraws protection, impeachment accelerates.
Step Three: Media as Force Multiplier
Once a motion is tabled, the media becomes a battlefield.
Selective leaks, dramatic press conferences, and moral framing shape public perception long before facts are tested. MCAs understand this. So do governors.
In cases like Sonko (Nairobi) and Waititu (Kiambu), media saturation turned impeachment into spectacle. The pressure made restraint politically costly. Momentum replaced deliberation.
Impeachment thrives on outrage. Silence kills it.
Step Four: Engineering Numbers, Not Truth
Weaponised impeachment is obsessed with arithmetic.
Attendance is choreographed. Absences are strategic. Vacancies are exploited. Two-thirds is not treated as a principle but as a puzzle to be solved.
Get Ibrahim Kimathi MINYORI’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
This explains why some motions collapse on technicalities — not because misconduct was disproved, but because numbers were miscalculated. In other cases, numbers are secured first, evidence later.
The vote becomes the goal. Process becomes collateral.
Case Study: Sonko and the Politics of Ungovernability
Mike Sonko’s downfall illustrates both the power and the limits of weaponisation.
Sonko was not removed simply because of allegations. He was removed because he became institutionally unmanageable. Civil servants revolted. The national government disengaged. Political allies fled.
At that point, impeachment stopped being a threat and became a necessity. Weaponisation turned inward. The system sought resolution, not leverage.
Case Study: Waititu and the End of Protection
Ferdinand Waititu’s case followed a similar arc. Once party shielding weakened and evidence accumulated, impeachment gained speed. MCAs sensed safety in numbers. The Senate sensed political cover.
Weaponisation gave way to execution.
Case Study: Mwangi and the Quiet Alternative
Contrast this with governors like Daniel Waithaka Mwangi (Nyandarua), whose legal troubles did not trigger impeachment in real time. Political shielding, weak incentives for MCAs, and procedural uncertainty slowed action to a halt.
Weaponisation requires coordination. Silence is its antidote.
The Cost of Weaponisation
This strategy corrodes institutions.
- MCAs learn to impeach strategically, not responsibly.
- Governors learn to govern defensively, not ethically.
- The Senate inherits poisoned records.
- Courts become cleanup crews.
Most dangerously, citizens lose the ability to distinguish genuine accountability from political assassination.
When impeachment becomes routine warfare, real misconduct hides behind claims of victimhood.
The Deeper Truth
Weaponisation flourishes because the system allows it.
Ambiguous standards. Weak incentives. Political parties without discipline. Media driven by spectacle. Assemblies rewarded for noise, not rigor.
Impeachment is not broken because politicians are immoral.
It is broken because the rules reward manipulation.
The Closing Reckoning
Impeachment should be rare, solemn, and precise. In Kenya, it has become frequent, theatrical, and tactical.
Until institutional incentives change — until evidence matters more than alliances and process more than politics — impeachment will remain a weapon rather than a safeguard.
And every time it is used that way, the Constitution loses a little of its authority.
Not with a bang.
But with applause.
