NAIROBI KENYA-Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale is facing a legal challenge seeking to have him declared constitutionally unfit to continue serving in public office over remarks he allegedly made during a public gathering in Mandera County.
Lawyers Lempaa Suyianka and Gitahi Gichuki have filed a constitutional petition before the High Court, arguing that Duale’s comments, allegedly made on July 20, 2026, while addressing residents in Lafey Constituency, fall short of the constitutional standards expected of a State officer.
Although Duale later clarified that the statement was a figurative Somali proverb referring to entrenched habits and not intended to insult or target any ethnic community, the petitioners argue that the court must determine whether the remarks were appropriate for a Cabinet Secretary.
“The issue before the court goes beyond the literal meaning of the proverb. It raises broader constitutional questions regarding the conduct of State officers when making public statements in Kenya’s politically sensitive environment,” the petition states.
The lawyers contend that Cabinet Secretaries are bound by constitutional principles requiring them to uphold national unity, equality, human dignity, integrity, accountability and professionalism while exercising public authority.
“Cabinet Secretaries are held to a higher constitutional standard of conduct and must avoid public communication that could reasonably be perceived as advancing ethnic division, partisan political interests or undermining national cohesion,” the petition reads.
In support of their case, the petitioners cite the findings of the Akiwumi Commission, the Kiliku Parliamentary Committee and the Waki Commission, arguing that Kenya’s history demonstrates how inflammatory political rhetoric and ethnic mobilisation have contributed to election-related violence.
The petition also asks the High Court to affirm that freedom of expression does not extend to hate speech, ethnic incitement, vilification or advocacy of hatred as prohibited under Article 33(2) of the Constitution.
“Freedom of expression does not extend to hate speech, ethnic incitement, vilification or advocacy of hatred as prohibited by the Constitution,” the lawyers argue.
Among the orders sought is a declaration that, should the court find Duale’s remarks amounted to ethnic vilification, he acted inconsistently with the constitutional principles of leadership and integrity and is therefore constitutionally unfit to continue serving as a Cabinet Secretary or in any other State office unless the conduct is remedied in accordance with the law.
The petitioners are also seeking an order of mandamus compelling the first respondent to honour summons issued by the interested party and participate in its proceedings.
“Failure by a State officer to comply with lawful summons undermines accountability, integrity and the rule of law,” the petition states.
The High Court is expected to give directions on the hearing of the petition.
