Impeachment Trial: Linturi Dealt Blow As Committee Allows New Witnesses

Agriculture Cabinet Secretary Mithika Linturi has been dealt a blow after the select committee considering his impeachment dismissed preliminary objections raised by his lawyer Muthomi Thionkalu on the admissibility of the case.

Mr Linturi's legal team argued that the impeachment motion was supported by a flawed affidavit.

Committee chairperson Naomi Waqo dismissed the objection, saying the Speaker of the National Assembly had already admitted the affidavit when he passed the motion, so the committee could not deal with the admissibility of the affidavit.

'The committee dismissed the objection that the affidavit of the motion was defective,' Ms Waqo said.

Mr Linturi suffered another blow after his objection to calling new witnesses was also rejected by the committee.

The committee directed Mr Wamboka to provide evidence to be relied on before the Agriculture PS and KEL chemicals LTD chief operating officer are summoned as provide

Mr Wamboka had asked the committee to allow him to call eight witnesses - six farmers and two experts.

In addition, Mr Wamboka asked the committee to allow him to call PS Rono of the Ministry of Agriculture and the Managing Director of KELS Chemicals to further strengthen his case.

In its ruling, the committee said Standing Order 191 and Article 125 of the Constitution give Parliament the power to call any witness to give evidence before it.

Mr Linturi's legal team had objected to the introduction of new evidence, saying it violated Article 50 of the Constitution on the fundamental rights of witnesses.

'Standing Order 64 stipulates that the motion as approved by the House should have contained the witness statements,' Thionkolu said.

The lawyer argued that they could not authenticate whether the farmers Mr Wamboka wanted to call as witnesses were registered for fertiliser subsidy, at which depot and on what dates.

Understand something

Mr Thionkolu also told the committee that the parties could not call anyone, saying that such powers only rested with the committee, which would decide which witnesses to call to enable it to understand something.

Mr Wamboka's lawyer John Khaminwa had asked the committee to dismiss Linturi's appeal, saying it trivialised a national issue. 'My learned friend is just trying to buy time in order for the matter not be concluded in time' Mr Khaminwa said.

Mr Wamboka also told the committee that if the CS is indeed innocent as claimed, then he should not worry about new witnesses.

'If indeed the CS is innocent, why should he worry about witnesses? Let the witnesses come and set him free if he is free indeed,' Mr Wamboka said.