Kalonzo tells Azimio MPs to occupy majority seats when Parliament resumes

A three-judge bench on Friday ruled that President William Ruto's Kenya Kwanza is not the majority and cannot claim seniority status.

Kalonzo therefore holds that the Azimio coalition should take their rightful position pending official House leadership changes.

"On Tuesday Azimio's leadership in Parliament should sit on the majority side because the court has pronounced itself. Azimio is the Majority in Parliament," he said at a roadside rally in Malindi on Sunday.

The political firebrand added that he has launched a political campaign to topple President Ruto's leadership ahead of the 2027 General Election.

He fired at Ruto's leadership, noting that his unpopularity is gaining pace and his term extension is under threat.

"You can see how Ruto is very unpopular, the other day you saw how he was heckled in Isiolo then he claims Kalonzo sent people to disrupt him," Kalonzo noted referring to President Ruto's encounter with a harsh crowd in Isiolo on Friday.

The High Court ruling has significant implications for the leadership structure in Parliament as it raises questions about the legitimacy of decisions made under Kenya Kwanza’s assumed majority status.

Justices John Chigiti, Lawrence Mugambi, and Jairus Ngaah also ruled that Speaker Moses Wetangula's dual role as both Speaker and leader of Ford Kenya is unconstitutional.

They held that Wetangula should have stepped down as Party Leader upon assuming the Speakership.

“The dual role is unlawful and unconstitutional. Once he became Speaker of the National Assembly, he ceased to be the leader of Ford Kenya party,” the court ruled.

In a swift rejoinder, Wetangula argued that at no point did the court order him to vacate his position as Speaker or cease being the Party Leader of Ford Kenya party.

He termed the ruling as mere "ordinary comments" in law that are non-binding and have no practical effect.

“I want to assure the nation and the Ford Kenya fraternity that there is absolutely no cause for alarm. What the court did was make comments—what the law terms as ‘obiter dictum’—which are non-binding and have no consequential effect,”  Wetangula stated.