The High Court has struck out President William Ruto’s name from a petition that sought to remove him from office through a national referendum.
The ruling brings clarity to the limits of presidential involvement in legal disputes while keeping the case alive through the Attorney General, who will continue to represent the government.
The petition had been filed by a group of activists who argued that the President had violated the Constitution and should therefore be subjected to a public vote on his tenure.
They listed the President as the main respondent, insisting that he was answerable for decisions they believed amounted to misconduct.
In its decision, the court stated that the President cannot be sued in person for actions done in the course of executing his official duties.
The judges explained that the Constitution protects the office of the President from direct legal challenges that target him individually.
Instead, such matters must be channelled through the Attorney General, who is mandated to represent the national government in all legal proceedings.
By removing President Ruto’s name from the case, the court underlined the importance of observing constitutional procedures when instituting actions against the head of state.
However, the ruling did not stop the petition from proceeding. The Attorney General will remain as the respondent and will be required to respond to the issues raised by the petitioners.
