A dramatic showdown unfolded at the County Assembly as Acting CEC for Finance and Economic Planning Hon. George Nyingiro defended himself against a 10-point censure motion accusing him of various acts of omission and commission allegedly undermining Articles 10, 73 and 201 of the Constitution.
The Assembly, after hours of debate, formally censured Nyingiro and directed the Office of the Governor to address the issues raised within 30 days, failure to which the House will “take appropriate action against the responsible officer.”
At the heart of the storm were claims touching on delayed remittances, financial management lapses, and failure to process certain salary by-products.
But appearing before the Assembly, Hon. Nyingiro came armed with files and figures.
He produced evidence showing the Finance Department had settled payments to contractors and suppliers amounting to Sh550 million for the Financial Year ending 2025—an attempt to counter accusations that his office had stalled or mishandled payments.
He insisted that the bulk of the allegations were misinformed or politically instigated, telling the House that each charge had a factual, document-backed explanation.
One of the sharpest accusations involved the non-remittance of PAYE and other salary-related by-products, a matter the Assembly argued had exposed employees and the county to legal and financial risk.
Nyingiro, however, shifted the blame squarely to the national government side, stating:
The exchequer was responsible for delays linked to PAYE.
The county could not remit what had not been released by the Controller of Budget.
For salary by-products such as those processed by SHA, he explained that the automated system rejects any irregular entries, including underpayments or overpayments — a safeguard that had contributed to some of the pending remittances.
CEC Denies All Charges
Despite the Assembly’s resolution, Nyingiro maintained he was not guilty of any wrongdoing, reiterating that every step taken by the Finance docket followed due procedure and that systemic challenges, not negligence, were to blame for delays cited in the motion.
The ball is now firmly in the Governor’s court. The Administration has 30 days to respond to the Assembly’s findings and recommendations.
Should the Governor fail to act, the Assembly has warned it will move decisively against the “responsible officer,” setting the stage for what could become one of the county’s most consequential administrative battles in recent years.
As political temperatures rise and financial scrutiny intensifies, all eyes will be on how the county leadership navigates the unfolding crisis.
Leave a Reply