Nominated Senator Gloria Orwoba has suffered a major setback after the High Court dismissed her attempt to block her expulsion from the United Democratic Alliance (UDA) party. In a ruling delivered by Justice Lawrence Mugambi, the court declared her application incompetent, citing procedural irregularities.
Justice Mugambi noted that Orwoba had amended her initial petition by adding new parties without seeking the court’s permission. “It is apparent that the applicant has added new parties who are not in the original petition and without seeking the leave of this court to amend the petition. The Application is incompetent and is rejected. Previous directions are maintained,” the judge ruled.
Orwoba had initially filed the petition on May 19, 2025, listing UDA and the Registrar of Political Parties as respondents. Her legal challenge came in the wake of her expulsion from UDA, which cited disloyalty and violation of the party’s Code of Conduct. Her attendance at the homecoming ceremony of former Interior Cabinet Secretary and opposition figure Dr. Fred Matiang’i—widely seen as a potential 2027 presidential contender—was at the heart of the accusations.
The party argued that her public criticism of government policies and association with opposition events constituted a breach of loyalty and party discipline. The UDA National Executive Committee ratified the Disciplinary Committee’s decision to expel Orwoba on May 19, and subsequently wrote to Senate Speaker Amason Kingi to initiate her removal from Parliament. Consolata Wabwire Wakwabubi has been nominated to replace her.
Earlier, the court had issued temporary orders halting UDA’s disciplinary proceedings, citing potential violations of natural justice and due process. The judge raised concerns about whether Orwoba had been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations.
However, the recent ruling suggests that Orwoba’s legal challenge may have hit a dead end unless refiled correctly. With the Senate expected to act on UDA’s letter, her political future now hangs in the balance. The ruling serves as a cautionary tale on the importance of procedural compliance in legal petitions.
