Members of County Assembly (MCAs) in Makueni County were so fed up with their Governor Kivutha Kibwana that they demanded mental examination of the Harvard-trained professor.
In their final report, the Mohamed Nyaoga-led commission of inquiry re-published a letter dated October 17, 2013 from the Clerk of the County Assembly to the county Minister of Health demanding a check-up of the governor.
Two days earlier, the County Assembly had, in a special sitting, received a notice of motion calling for removal of Kibwana on among other grounds, lack of physical and mental capacity to discharge his duties.
The letter was titled “Re: Investigation into the physical and mental capacity of the Governor Makueni County.” The assembly now wanted the minister, Dr Mutava Mulwa, to help the health committee to ascertain Kibwana’s fitness.
“The committee during its sitting held on Thursday, 17th October resolved to request you to appoint a certified professional to assess the governor to ascertain whether or not he has physical and mental capacity to discharge the duties of his office,” the letter by Edward Libendi stated.
READ MORE
Tall tales of toads and political chameleons hiding in plain sight
Under Sakaja's government, Nairobi is at its lowest ever
Impeachment drama: Why governors always survive
Governor Nyaribo denies charges as Senate hears impeachment motion
The letter said due to the urgency of the matter, the minister was required to present the medical report to the committee within five days and before October 22, 2013.
In its report, the commission concludes that seeking the mental status of the governor was done in bad faith. The commission said it was obvious that the governor “clearly stood in the way of the Assembly operating as an entity that was not part of the Makueni County Government.”
The Commission noted that Kibwana had previously served in two Cabinet portfolios concurrently and as the President’s advisor on Constitutional matters.
“The Assembly was prepared to impute mental incapacity on the person of the Governor to get their way.”
“The letter was, clearly, an instrument to exacerbate the conflict as the Clerk ought to have known that once the Assembly makes the resolution to remove the Governor, Section 33 of the County Governments Act, 2012 does not provide for communication with the Executive and the Governor in that regard,” report said.
