Impeached Meru Governor Kawira Mwangaza’s turbulent reign came crashing down on Friday, March 14, 2025, as the High Court upheld her impeachment, officially sending her packing after just three years in office.
Mwangaza, who had stunned Meru’s political old guard—including seasoned heavyweights Kiraitu Murungi and Mithika Linturi—by clinching the governorship as an independent candidate in a region swept by William Ruto’s UDA wave, found herself on a collision course with the County Assembly almost immediately after being sworn in.
Riding on the goodwill of Meru residents enamoured with her Okolea initiative—her signature welfare program from her tenure as Women Representative—Mwangaza had initially commanded strong public support. But that backing quickly unravelled as friction with MCAs escalated from mere disagreements to outright hostility.
What began as murmurs of nepotism soon spiralled into full-blown accusations of misusing public funds, abusing power, and showing blatant contempt for the County Assembly. Determined to oust her, the MCAs methodically built their case, chipping away at her administration piece by piece.
What first seemed like minor grievances snowballed into an unstoppable impeachment motion—one that ultimately sealed her fate, bringing her once-promising leadership to an unceremonious end. With that, let’s take a quick look at some of the political battles she fought with MCAs that only strengthened their resolve to push her out.
Nepotism
Kawira’s troubles with the county assembly began almost as soon as she took office, with the first signs of discord surfacing when MCAs accused her of practicing nepotism by appointing close family members to key government positions.
Among the most contentious appointments was that of her husband, Murega Baichu, whom she controversially named the Patron of Meru Youth Service (MYS) and Hustlers Ambassador.
The move infuriated MCAs, who viewed it as an abuse of office and a blatant attempt to place an unelected individual in a position of power without undergoing due process.
While Baichu defended his appointment, arguing that he was merely acting as a mentor and donor to the program without receiving a salary, the MCAs insisted that the move was unlawful and demonstrated the governor’s disregard for proper governance structures.
This appointment marked the beginning of a prolonged standoff between Mwangaza and the county assembly, setting the stage for deeper conflicts that would emerge in the years to follow.
Misuse of authority
The second major incident that fanned the flames of hostility between Mwangaza and the MCAs was her decision to rename a public road after her husband, a move that many legislators saw as an outright misuse of authority.
The decision was met with immediate backlash, with the MCAs arguing that naming public infrastructure after a private citizen, particularly one with no official role in the county government, was both inappropriate and illegal.
This decision fuelled accusations that the governor was running the county as a personal enterprise rather than a public office, further straining her already fragile relationship with the legislative wing of the county government.
The MCAs, emboldened by the growing dissent among county leaders, used this incident to reinforce their claims that Mwangaza was unfit for office, laying the groundwork for an impeachment motion that they would later escalate to the Senate.
Public resources
Another significant misstep that contributed to Mwangaza’s downfall was her handling of county funds, with MCAs accusing her of diverting and misusing public resources for personal and political gain.
According to the county assembly, Mwangaza allegedly funnelled county funds through her relatives, making false claims of payments for goods and services that were either never supplied or grossly inflated in cost.
These accusations were further compounded by reports that she had authorised full salaries and benefits for at least four high-ranking county officials who had not rendered any services for over a year.
The MCAs argued that these financial irregularities were not only unethical but also placed a significant strain on the county’s resources, leaving essential services underfunded.
The executive, on the other hand, defended itself by pointing fingers at the assembly, accusing MCAs of deliberately slashing the budget in a bid to frustrate Mwangaza’s administration.
This ongoing blame game deepened the rift between the two sides, pushing the county into a state of political paralysis.
Bullying
The fourth point of contention that drove a wedge between the governor and the MCAs was her approach to dealing with dissent and criticism from county leaders.
Mwangaza was repeatedly accused of bullying, vilifying, and demeaning elected leaders who did not align with her vision, creating a toxic political environment within the county.
MCAs lamented that instead of fostering collaboration and dialogue, the governor resorted to aggressive tactics, often using public platforms to launch personal attacks against her critics.
Her leadership style, which was seen as abrasive and unyielding, alienated not only the MCAs but also several key stakeholders within the county government.
As tensions escalated, the county assembly increasingly viewed her as a divisive figure whose continued stay in office would only breed further chaos and stagnation in service delivery.
Debts
The final nail in the coffin for Mwangaza was the continued delay in clearing pending bills, a matter that the MCAs argued had crippled essential county operations and development projects.
The county’s finance team, led by County Secretary Kiambi Atheru and Finance Chief Officer Charles Mwenda, came under intense scrutiny for failing to disburse payments to suppliers and contractors, many of whom had been waiting for months, if not years, to receive their dues.
While the executive placed the blame squarely on the county assembly for allegedly frustrating budget approvals, the MCAs countered by arguing that the governor had mismanaged resources and prioritised non-essential expenditures over critical projects.
As financial woes in the county deepened, the MCAs became increasingly resolute in their efforts to have her removed, culminating in the impeachment motion that was ultimately upheld by the Senate.
End of road
Mwangaza’s impeachment marked the end of a tumultuous tenure that had been marred by constant battles with the MCAs, legal challenges, and a general sense of instability in the county government.
Interestingly, this was not the first time that Mwangaza had faced an impeachment attempt.
In December 2024, she narrowly survived an ouster bid after securing a court order that temporarily halted the process, granting her three more months in office.
During that time, she attempted to mend fences with the MCAs, but the efforts proved futile as the legislators remained steadfast in their push to remove her.
The MCAs repeatedly snubbed meetings she convened, leaving her to address an empty room while insisting that the backlash came only from politicians, not the people of Meru.
Now, despite her husband’s defiant claims that they might escalate the matter to higher courts in a bid to reclaim her seat, the county has moved on. On Monday, March 17, 2025, Deputy Governor Mutuma Methingwa was officially sworn in, cementing Mwangaza’s political downfall and leaving no room for a comeback.
