Former Nairobi Governor Mike Mbuvi Sonko has told the court that his refusal to sign the county budget was at the centre of his dispute with the national government and preceded his impeachment. Sonko said he declined to approve the budget after consulting the county attorney and his lawyers, who advised him that there was no clear legal framework allowing the county to fund certain functions transferred to it by the national government.
According to Sonko, the transferred functions included transport and infrastructure, health, education, and housing. He said he subsequently discussed the matter with then-President Uhuru Kenyatta, explaining why he had refused to sign the budget. Sonko maintained that the disagreement over the budget was one of the main issues that eventually contributed to his removal from office.
Sonko also defended himself against allegations surrounding his impeachment, saying he opposed the process because he believed it was politically motivated and contrary to the law. He recalled that the impeachment proceedings were televised and claimed that a significant number of Members of the County Assembly supported him. Sonko said about 76 MCAs were on his side during the proceedings.
The matter later proceeded to the Senate, where Sonko alleged that some senators publicly claimed they had been offered bribes to vote for his removal. He said the allegations involved payments allegedly intended to influence senators to support the impeachment. Sonko said that after his removal, he continued challenging the decision through the courts.
During his testimony, Sonko was also questioned about his opposition to the demolition of structures and various development projects in Nairobi. He linked some of the disputes to what he described as investments associated with members of the former first family. He referred to companies and investments, including Home Choice Holdings Limited and Northlands.
Sonko was asked to explain the interests he believed the family had in Nairobi and why those interests were relevant to his opposition to certain county decisions. He defended his popularity among Nairobi residents at the time, saying his support among voters influenced his opposition to actions that he believed would affect the people who had elected him.
Sonko further explained his opposition to the demolition of structures in parts of Nairobi, saying some of the demolitions were carried out without adequate consultation. He argued that affected residents should have been engaged before such action was taken. The former governor maintained that his decisions were informed by his interpretation of the law and his responsibility to protect the interests of Nairobi residents.
Key points
- Sonko's refusal to sign county budget was central to his dispute with national government.
- Sonko alleged that some senators were offered bribes to vote for his removal.
- Sonko defended his opposition to demolition of structures in Nairobi, citing lack of consultation with affected residents.
