Otiende Amollo Joins Sifuna Team, Sends Dangerous Warning To Ruto's Camp

Added: 2026-05-07

[00:00:01]The Rarieda member of parliament Otiende Amollo has officially joined Sifuna's statement by saying and defending the former president of Kenya, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta. Welcome to Kenya Lens Media, where we give you news updates as they break. Here we talk [music] and also analyze politics. So, if you're new here, consider subscribing.

[00:00:22]Now, the Rarieda member of parliament Otiende Amollo has dismissed a motion by the Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei seeking to scrap retirement [music] benefits of the former president uh stating that such benefits are protected by the Constitution and also cannot be altered during a former president's lifetime. The debate over the retirement benefits for for the former presidents has taken a firm constitutional turn with the legal and political leaders weighing in on what what is increasingly becoming a high-stakes national discussion. At the center of the issue is a motion proposed by Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei. The motion seeks to remove or reduce the retirement perks granted to former heads of state. It has packed immediate reaction not only in the parliament, but across the broader political landscape.

[00:01:16]The Rarieda member of parliament Otiende Amollo, a constitutional lawyer and one of the framers of the Kenya's Constitution, has strongly pushed back against the proposal. And in a statement issued on Wednesday, April 6th, 2026, Amollo described the motion as unnecessary and not worthy of national attention. He pointed to the Constitution specifically Article 151(3) [music] as the legal foundation protecting the retirement benefits of the former presidents. And according to him, the provision was deliberately included to ensure stability and fairness, preventing any changes that would disadvantage a former president during their lifetime.

[00:02:00]And according to the statement given by >> [music] >> Otiende Amollo on his social media platform, he said that and I'll quote, "Some debates are really a waste of time. This purported motion by Senator Cherargei is idle and not worthy discussion. The benefits due to any former president cannot be altered to the disadvantage during their lifetime.

[00:02:23]We specifically inserted this in the Constitution A 151(3)."

[00:02:31]That was a strong statement that was written by Otiende Amollo in his social media accounts. Amollo's position is clear. That he argues that the Constitution explicitly safeguards these benefits, making any attempt to alter them through a simple parliamentary motion legally untenable. His remarks signal a broader concern among some lawmakers that the debate may be drifting away from constitutional principles and into political territory.

[00:03:03]This perspective is shared by Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna, who also has also come out strongly in defense of the former president of Kenya, Uhuru Kenyatta. Sifuna has described the motion as unlikely to succeed, emphasizing that constitutional provisions cannot be overturned through ordinary legislative process.

[00:03:25]He maintains that any attempt to change retirement benefits for former presidents would require a referendum, a far more complex and also demanding process involving the direct participation of the Kenyan people. And according to Sifuna, the Senate does not have the authority to unilaterally alter such entrenched provisions. And he further argues that the matter falls outside the scope of what the Senate can legally debate in terms of financial allocations. The discussion has gained momentum amid increasing political pressure surrounding the role of former President Uhuru Kenyatta in current affairs. In recent developments, the former president delivered a speech that has drawn widespread attention across the country. And the address, shared through his brother Muhoho Kenyatta's phone, addressed ongoing criticism regarding his involvement in politics after leaving office. In that speech, Uhuru Kenyatta reaffirmed his right to participate in political discourse. And he indicated that retirement from office does not equate to silence, particularly when it comes to defending political ideals and affiliations. He referenced international examples, including the United States, where former leaders continue to engage in political discussions even after the their terms had rather have ended. The comparison underscores a broader global norm where former heads of state [music] remain active voices in public life.

[00:04:54]The speech has added a new dimension to the ongoing debate linking the issue of retirement benefits to the broader question of political participation after office. Support for the former president has also come from one political leaders. And Democracy for Citizens party leader Rigathi Gachagua has publicly defended Uhuru Kenyatta stating that it is his responsibility to stand by the former head of state.

[00:05:21]Gachagua has criticized attempts to strip away retirement benefits, framing them as unjust and also inconsistent with the constitutional projections. He has further suggested that any such moves would be reversed in the future depending on political shifts in power.

[00:05:39]His remarks highlighted the political undercurrents surrounding the debate as different factions position themselves on this issue. At its core, the discussion raises important questions about governance, constitutional integrity, and the treatment of the former leaders. For many Kenyans, the issue is not just about financial benefits, but about the rule of law and the respect for the constitutional provisions. The Constitution serves as the supreme law of the land and any attempt to alter its provisions requires strict adherence to established procedures. Legal experts emphasize that bypassing this procedural could also or rather procedures could set up concerning president. The debate also reflects the broader dynamics of Kenya's political environment where legal frameworks often intersect with political interests.

[00:06:33]And while some leaders argue for accountability and review of benefits, [music] others stress the importance of maintaining constitutional order and protecting [music] established rights.

[00:06:44]As the conversation continues, the focus is likely to remain on whether the motion has any legal [music] standing and also what implications it could have for future governance. The positions taken by key leaders suggest that the motion faces significant both legally and also politically. And for now, the issue remains a subject of national interest, drawing attention from lawmakers, legal experts, and also citizens alike. As the debate as the debate unfolds, one thing remains clear.

[00:07:16]And in matters of constitution, the law sets the limits and the nation watches closely how those limits are tested.

[00:07:25]That is all for today as Kenya Lens Media. Kindly, if you're new here, consider subscribing, liking, and sharing our content to various platforms such as WhatsApp groups and also Facebook. Hit the notification bell so that you can be receiving notifications each and every time we bring you a new content. And also, you can write your comment down there in the comment section so [music] that we can have a debate. I'll respond to all comments in the comment section so that we can discuss and also it can form a basis of whatever I'm going to talk about >> [music] >> in the next video.