Court: No proof Isiolo speaker was removed from office

The Employment and Labour Relations Court has dismissed a petition by Isiolo County Assembly Speaker Abdullahi Banticha, ruling that there was no evidence he had been removed from office.

In a judgment delivered on Tuesday, Justice Helen Wasilwa found that the case was prematurely brought before the court, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate any actual or completed process to oust him from speakership.

"This court cannot grant orders in a vacuum where the orders that are being sought have been denied by the makers themselves," the judge said.

She said there was no tangible proof of a decision, motion or gazette notice effecting Banticha’s removal.

The speaker had moved to court seeking protection after reports emerged over the alleged revocation of his appointment in a gazette notice published in July last year.

However, the court heard that the only valid gazette notice on record was the one issued on June 27 last year, which formalised Banticha’s appointment as speaker.

Justice Wasilwa noted that claims that a subsequent notice had been issued to degazette Banticha were not substantiated with the alleged publication being disowned and described as lacking authenticity.

The judge further observed that in the absence of a lawful resolution and a corresponding valid notice, there was no basis to conclude that Banticha had been removed from office.

"The 1st respondent, government press, indicated there is no evidence before the court that there is any decision or notice to degazette the gazette notice of June 27, 2025, which had put the petitioner in place, and therefore the orders being sought were speculative and premature," she stated in her ruling.

The judge also declined to interrogate internal proceedings of the Isiolo County Assembly, including how the Speaker was elected or whether any removal process had been initiated.

She said the court’s mandate is limited to employment and labour relations disputes and does not extend to determining legislative procedures or motions within a county assembly.

“I have not been asked to ascertain who, as between the petitioner and the interested party, is the Speaker and I decline to go in that direction,” she said.

The court said no evidence had been presented to show that a motion to remove Banticha had been tabled or processed in accordance with the law.

As such, she said the petition was based on anticipated actions rather than a proven violation of rights.

"And therefore, the petition was filed in my view prematurely; I'm saying it came prematurely based on an occurrence rather than an actual or a crystallised violation of his rights," Justice Wasilwa ruled.

The ruling comes amid a protracted leadership wrangle in the Isiolo County Assembly.