Tribunal to decide PNU's fate as row over dissolution deepens

Meru Governor Peter Munya (right) and Party of National Unity executive director Paul Rukaria during the hearing of PNU-Jubilee merger case by a Political Parties Dispute Tribunal at Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi yesterday. (PHOTO: DAVID NJAAGA/ STANDARD)

The folding up of the Party of National Unity (PNU) to join President Uhuru Kenyatta’s Jubilee Party was unprocedural, a group told the Political Parties Tribunal.

PNU Secretary General John Anunda yesterday said that John Kamama, who declared the dissolution of the party, was not the chairman of the outfit.

He explained that Mr Kamama had not been gazetted by the Registrar of Political Parties and thus could not append his signature on the resolution for PNU to join Jubilee.

The secretary general also said that Kamama could not have given the green light for the party to fold up without the blessings from the National Delegates Council (NDC).

The tribunal heard that documents used by officials who were pro-merger had been ‘cooked’.

“There is nowhere that shows that Kamama is PNU chairman. The process was an illegality and the only remedy available is to declare the merger between Jubilee and PNU a nullity,” said Mr Anunda.

The Registrar of Political Parties Lucy Ndung’u told the tribunal that PNU officials protesting about the merger never raised any objection to the office.

Political Parties Tribunal heard that the seven day-window provided by the Political Parties Act for filing of complaints lapsed without any one raising questions about the merger.

The registrar, through lawyer Mark Oloo, said that gazetting of the merger was within the law and thus the case before the tribunal had no basis.

“They did not raise objections to the merger within the seven days,” the tribunal heard.

She said that she could have stopped the gazettement if they had raised complaints.

The registrar said that she had to gazette the dissolution the following day after the announcement of the merger since there could have been a vacuum in respect to President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto.

“If we did not gazette the merger, someone could have come up and claimed that the president and his deputy did not have parties and thus ought not to lead the country,” he said.

Challenged

On the other hand, Kamama, through lawyer Hillary Sigei, told the tribunal that Anunda could not have signed the merger since his position was being challenged.

The lawyer said that his client ceased to be the chairman only after the merger of the parties.

Mr Sigei added that Kamama became PNU’s chairman in 2015 but was not gazetted.

The tribunal heard that Kamama had all along been acknowledged as the chairman but when the row erupted, the splinter group claimed he had been illegally operating as the chairman.

The lawyer said that wrangles within the party could not have blocked the merger.

The tribunal will rule on the case on October 26.