MPs target CS Henry Rotich in ouster plan
Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich before a National Assembly committee. MPs have directed him to conduct an independent audit of the IFMIS and provide a detailed cost-benefit analysis. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP
What you need to know:
The MPs accuse the CS of opening the floodgates for contraband sugar through a gazette notice in 2017 on duty free sugar.
Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich is also accused of releasing Sh1.5 billion of taxpayers' money for the payment of Ruaraka land without due diligence.
The sugar imports culminated in the flooding of the market with sugar, some of which has been found to be toxic and also harmed local millers.
The fate of Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich hangs in the balance after it emerged MPs have hatched a plan to kick him out of office.
The MPs want Mr Rotich out of office for the importation of sugar during the 2017 duty-free window and the payment of Sh1.5 billion for the Ruaraka land on which two public schools stand.
The push to kick out the CS is being propelled by Kimilili MP Didmus Barasa, who by last evening had garnered the support of 96 of the mandatory 116 MPs required to successfully send Mr Rotich home.
The MPs accuse the CS of opening the floodgates for contraband sugar through a gazette notice in 2017 on duty free sugar and releasing Sh1.5 billion of taxpayers' money for the payment of Ruaraka land without due diligence.
The imports culminated in the flooding of the market with sugar, some of which has been found to be toxic and also harmed local millers.
SUGAR MESS
“It is in the public domain that the CS Treasury is to blame for the sugar mess in the country and the use of taxpayers’ money to pay for the Ruaraka land,” Mr Barasa said on Tuesday.
He added: “The fact that I have acquired 96 signatures and six more MPs have promised me that they will sign by close of business (Tuesday is an indication that this matter is gaining momentum at a high rate. I am optimistic that by next week I will have garnered the required signatures to move my motion.”
However, questions have been raised in the corridors of Parliament on whether the push was legitimate. For starters, the MP appeared to have breached the procedure laid out by Speaker Justin Muturi in the Anne Waiguru versus Alfred Keter case of 2015. If Mr Barasa had followed the guidelines, then he would have first developed grounds for the CS’s removal, gathered evidence and submitted it to the Speaker’s office.
GROSS MISCONDUCT
It’s upon being satisfied the evidence raises substantial grounds that Mr Muturi would have given Mr Barasa the go-ahead to collect the signatures from MPs.
It is on the basis of this process that the Speaker rejected an attempt by Mr Keter to have Ms Waiguru sent home over claims of gross misconduct.
The Constitution requires at least a third of the 349 members of the National Assembly to append their signatures to meet the threshold of impeaching a CS.
Exuding confidence that this time around Parliament is serious in sending the CS home, Mr Barasa dismissed allegations that he might just be pushing for the ouster for rent seeking purposes.
In reference to the failure of a similar motion meant to send home Health CS Sicily Kariuki in March, Mr Barasa said the MPs pushing it relied on hearsay. “My motion is supported by facts which even the public knows,” he said.
