Relief for politicians as court rules only resignation can prove defection in party-hopping cases

In a judgment delivered by a three-judge bench, the court dismissed a petition seeking the removal of Isiolo Governor Abdi Guyo and his deputy John Lowasa over claims that they had defected from the Jubilee Party to the United Democratic Alliance (UDA).

The judges held that political migration, political alignment, or public association with another party does not amount to legal defection unless the strict resignation process under Sections 10 and 11 of the Political Parties Act is followed and proven in court.

The petition, filed by Guyo Ali, Mohammed Wario, Teddy Muturi and Steven Kihonge, was dismissed after the court found no evidence of valid resignation documents submitted to Jubilee or the Registrar of Political Parties.

While reaffirming the central role of political parties in Kenya’s multiparty system, the court drew a distinction between political loyalty and constitutional office, noting that governors hold executive authority on behalf of the people and not their political parties.

Even so, the bench cautioned that unregulated party hopping poses serious risks to democratic stability, warning that failure to follow the law in changing party allegiance raises ethical and integrity concerns that offend Article 10(2) of the Constitution.

The court further observed that although irregular defections undermine accountability and good governance under Articles 10 and 4(c), courts can only act where the legal threshold of proof is met.

In their response, Governor Guyo and his deputy maintained that they had never resigned from Jubilee, arguing that the petition was built on assumptions and political rhetoric rather than hard evidence.

The court ultimately dismissed the case, safeguarding the governor and his deputy’s tenure and reaffirming that constitutional removal from office cannot be anchored on speculation or political perception.