Mutula, Ledama defend Sonko in row over city control

Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko. He has not settled issues regarding transfer of functions to the Nairobi Metropolitan Services. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Budget committee chairman Robert Mbatia said that the committee did not receive any copy of the memorandum as required by law.
  • Senator Mutula asked Ms Elachi to stop personalising matters and do what is lawfully required as a Speaker.

Two senators have waded into the standoff at Nairobi County over the Sh15 billion allocated to Nairobi Metropolitan Services (NMS) for transferred functions.

The senators said Governor Mike Sonko was right in refusing to assent to the Supplementary Appropriations Bill as he cannot appropriate money he has not received.

Makueni Senator Mutula Kilonzo and his Narok counterpart Ledama ole Kina said that Deed of Transfer of Function states that money for the transferred county functions is supposed to be appropriated from the County Revenue Fund and not by the assembly.

“As we speak, the National Assembly has put the funds under the Consolidated Fund and both Houses have not agreed on it; therefore, there is nothing the county assembly can do,” said Senator Mutula.

A supremacy battle between Governor Sonko and Speaker Beatrice Elachi for the control of the county has been raging since the two leaders fell out early this year.

The power tussle between the two has spilt over and threatens to derail the execution of the Deed of Transfer of functions and the operations of NMS.

SPECIAL SITTING

On April 2, Nairobi MCAs approved over Sh15 billion to the new administration through a Supplementary Appropriations Bill.

However, when the bill was taken to Governor Sonko for assent, he declined to append his signature, accusing the Assembly led by Speaker Elachi, of overstepping its mandate by allocating funds to functions that were not part of the Deed of Transfer of functions.

Speaker Elachi hurriedly convened a special sitting two days later and rejected the governor’s memorandum, terming it “fatally flawed” and in the process sent the original bill back to him to sign within seven days.

She also adjourned the House to June. Mr Kina has defended Mr Sonko, saying Speaker Elachi cannot decline the memorandum.

On his part, Governor Sonko has also stood his ground, saying that his memorandum remains binding as it is properly before the Assembly and at the conclusion of the seven days, and in the event there is no communication from the members, the memorandum shall become law.

“She is lying that there were objections by the MCAs. No single member received the memorandum as it is expected in law. So the speaker is trying to frustrate the implementation of the Deed of Transfer and with the hope that she can blame that on the governor,” said Governor Sonko’s spokesperson, Mr Ben Mulwa.

BUDGET COMMITTEE

Ms Elachi, however, hit back, reminding Governor Sonko to respect the Assembly’s Budget committee that appropriated the allocations, insisting the House debated the memorandum.

She also reminded the governor that he had transferred the functions based on article 187 of the Constitution.

“You must respect the budget committee of the assembly. They did not change anything or remove anything. You need two thirds to do anything and with Covid-19 crisis, we want want to see the best solution for Nairobi,” she said.

However, the assembly’s budget committee chairman Robert Mbatia said that the committee did not receive any copy of the memorandum as required by law.

“We never saw the governor’s memorandum. We all received a text in the morning calling us for a special sitting,” said Mr Mbatia.

Senator Mutula asked Ms Elachi to stop personalising matters and do what is lawfully required as a Speaker.

“When a governor, just like the president, sends a memorandum, according to Article 115 of the Constitution, you cannot send it back; you either amend it or pass it as it is by two-thirds majority. That is what we refer as veto power,” said Mr Mutula.

“What I understand is that she just read a letter giving a ruling. This is a complete misunderstanding of the law,” he added.