Speaker reprimands Kimunya

Kipipiri MP Amos Kimunya was on Thursday chastised by Parliament for seeking to absolve himself from the controversial Grand Regency Hotel sale at a public rally.

He was censured for demeaning the integrity of Speaker Kenneth Marende, referring to the House in a contemptuous manner, taking debate on the hotel to a public rally in defiance of the Speaker’s ruling, and using inappropriate language not befitting of MPs.

However, Mr Kimunya escaped being dragged before the House committee on Powers and Privileges which has the power to deliver severe judgment.

Foot thumping

Mr Marende, in his ruling over the utterances that the Kipipiri MP made in Kinangop on Sunday, declared that his action amounted to gross misconduct.

“The conduct, actions and unwarranted utterances by Mr Kimunya amount to gross misconduct ... and the chair (Speaker) strongly takes great exception to them. I, therefore, without any reservation severely reprimand the member for Kipipiri for gross misconduct,” he ruled to loud foot thumping by MPs.

He also ruled that Mr Kimunya’s utterances painted the Speaker in a bad light and questioned his independence in making decisions on weighty matters.

“By alleging that if the substantive Speaker was in chair, the motion would not have been allowed, Mr Kimunya cast aspersions on the integrity, capacity and independence of the Chair. It was far-fetched, speculative and unacceptable.”

The ruling was prompted by a request by Joint Coalition Chief Whip Jakoyo Midiwo (Gem-ODM) who on Tuesday sought the Speaker’s opinion on Mr Kimunya’s utterances during the thanks-giving ceremony of Kinangop MP David Ngugi (Sisi kwa Sisi).

Mr Marende also attended the event.

Mr Midiwo said that the Kipipiri MP and 15 other lawmakers had attempted, in the presence of Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka, to prove that a motion of no-confidence passed in him by the House had not been conducted properly.

“Kimunya cast aspersions on this House at a goat eating ceremony where he said that were the Speaker in the country, the motion would not have passed.”

Mr Midiwo said that there was a clear attempt from Mr Kimunya and some MPs to influence the outcome of the investigation by the Parliamentary committee on Finance and Trade and that of the commission of inquiry appointed by the President. “Mr Speaker Sir, we are turning to you to clarify whether or not you gave assurances that the motion passed by the House in the former minister was out of order,” he said.

In his ruling on Thursday, Mr Marende referred to some quotable judgments of his predecessors, Sir Humphrey Slade and Mr Francis ole Kaparo on the issue of taking debate on substantive matters before the House to public rallies.

He quoted Sir Humphrey who on August 12, 1969, ruled: “What I said about carrying debate outside applies only to debates on substantive motions which result in a  definite solution. The subject matter of such debates, indeed, must not be discussed by Hon member publicly outside the House while debate is pending…whatever the nature of the proceedings, things said by Hon members in this House may only be answered by other members in this House.”

He also quoted Mr Kaparo’s ruling on April 18, 1995: “I do rule without fear of possible contradictions that our present procedure and practice bar Hon members from referring to, commenting or continuing debate outside this chamber on substantive matters not yet disposed of by this House.”

Mr Marende said he had requested a recording of Mr Kimunya’s Kinangop utterances and found that they were contemptuous of the House and to him.