Democracy for Citizens Party (DCP) Deputy Party Leader Cleophas Malala has been directed to pay Sh150,000 in legal costs after losing a case against the United Democratic Alliance (UDA) and its Chairperson Cecily Mbarire. The ruling, issued by the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT), marks a significant setback for Malala, who challenged the party’s recent internal restructuring process.
Malala, who previously served as UDA Secretary General, had filed a case disputing the legality of the party’s internal changes. He argued that the restructuring, which included his removal from office, was unconstitutional and politically motivated. He further claimed that the changes were made without adherence to the UDA constitution and were designed to weaken his influence in the party.
However, the tribunal dismissed Malala’s arguments, affirming that the matter should have first been addressed through the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms before escalating to external legal forums. In its decision, the PPDT ruled that Malala’s case lacked merit and unnecessarily burdened the respondents with legal expenses.
The certificate of taxation, signed on July 15, 2025, by Lydiah Mbacho, Registrar of the High Court at the PPDT, certified that Mbarire’s party incurred legal costs totaling Sh150,000. These costs, filed by Adrian Kamotho Njenga & Company Advocates on behalf of the UDA Chairperson, are now to be paid by Malala.
This development comes after earlier court rulings also upheld Malala’s removal from his position as UDA secretary general. The High Court had affirmed President William Ruto’s party’s decision to replace him with Hassan Omar, nullifying a previous order that had temporarily stopped the Registrar of Political Parties from effecting the change.
Malala’s fall from grace in the ruling party appears complete, and the tribunal’s decision further cements his political isolation within UDA. The case also highlights the importance of exhausting internal party mechanisms before seeking judicial intervention, a point clearly emphasized by the tribunal in its ruling.
