Speaker Wetangula slams Raila over claim Parliament captured by Executive

National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetangula has hit back at opposition leader Raila Odinga for criticising him for filing a petition at the Supreme Court contesting the Court of Appeal's ruling on the contentious Finance Act, 2023.

Wetangula's sentiments come after Mr. Odinga, on Sunday at Kamukunji Grounds, said the former Bungoma Senator's action disqualifies him from being National Assembly Speaker.

The Azimio la Umoja One Kenya coalition party boss also accused Wetangula of being subject to State capture, pointing to alleged frequent and irregular visits to State House for the approval of numerous Bills into law.

In a rejoinder on Tuesday, Wetangula labelled Mr. Odinga’s utterances as embarrassing and misleading, further noting that his actions are eroding confidence in Parliament.

"It is quite embarrassing for the former Prime Minister to be making statements that portray him and or his advisers or handlers as being ignorant of the law in particular on the role of the Speaker of the National Assembly," said Wetangula.  

"The baseless remarks have been used to mislead the public as a decoy for diluting public confidence in the institution of Parliament, which is quite unfortunate. More so considering that the subject is a former Member of Parliament."

He emphasized that as the incumbent Speaker of the National Assembly, he is legally obliged to attend court proceedings when they pertain to legal matters involving his office.

"In court proceedings by or against the Speaker of the National Assembly, it is then serving the Speaker of the National Assembly who has the legal duty to appear in court and defend the case," he said.

"The Speaker is hence rightfully in court and has the constitutional right to appeal any decision of the Court of Appeal on behalf of the National Assembly."

Regarding the issue of purported irregular summons to State House, Wetangula clarified that he is obligated by law to participate in such gatherings, citing the United States system as a reference.

"Consequently, the facilitative role of the Speakers of Parliament in the legislative processes by formally presenting the Bills for assent to the President finds its basis not just in the Constitution but in established parliamentary practice as well," said Wetangula.  

"Indeed, looking at comparative jurisdictions such as the US Congressional system, a Bill once passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate, is subsequently submitted to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House for their signatures and thereafter it is referred to the President for assent. Therefore, it would be unconstitutional for the President to assent to Bills not formally presented by the Speakers of Parliament as required by the Constitution."