Expelled Football Kenya Federation Vice-President MacDonald Mariga has broken his silence following Saturday’s FKF Special General Meeting in Meru, rejecting the decision to dismiss seven NEC members, which he describes as unconstitutional, and declaring that the fight for accountability, constitutionalism and good governance in Kenyan football continues.

In a press release sent to the media this morning, Mariga, speaking on behalf of the 7 affected NEC members, challenged the legality of the resolutions passed during the November 7 meeting, arguing that the process disregarded fundamental provisions of the FKF Constitution.

The Meru SGM culminated in a major shake-up of FKF leadership, with delegates voting overwhelmingly to expel Mariga and 6 other NEC members over alleged constitutional violations and breaches of applicable FIFA regulations.

Mariga lost both his position as Vice-President and NEC membership after receiving 65 votes in favour of his expulsion against one opposing vote.

The other officials expelled were Robert Kenneth Macharia (Central), Gabriel Mghendi (Coast), Collins Opiyo Kalee (Nyanza), Bernard Korir Lagat (Upper Rift Valley), Violet Kerubo Momanyi (Women’s Representative) and Daniel Akala Shikanda (Nairobi).

The meeting was also marked by disruption after police officers entered the venue and fired tear gas, forcing delegates to temporarily flee before proceedings resumed.

However, two days after the Congress resolutions, Mariga has now questioned the manner in which the 7 officials were removed, placing particular emphasis on Article 41(4) and (5) of the FKF Constitution, which provides for the right to be heard and outlines the procedure for dismissing elected officials.

He alleges that 7 NEC members, alongside 32 duly accredited Congress delegates, were denied access to the meeting venue, describing their exclusion as a deliberate attempt to silence elected leaders who have consistently championed accountability, transparency and good governance within the federation.

Mariga particularly takes issue with the voting procedure, arguing that Article 41(5) expressly requires dismissal motions to be decided through a secret ballot. He maintains that the resolutions in Meru were instead adopted through acclamation, contrary to the constitutional provision.

The statement further references FIFA’s intervention in May 2026, which, according to Mariga, emphasised the importance of respecting Article 41 and its due-process safeguards, particularly the right to be heard, regardless of an official’s position or the nature of the allegations against them.

“More fundamentally, Article 41(5) expressly provides that a dismissal motion SHALL be decided by secret ballot. This is a mandatory constitutional requirement, not an optional procedure,” Mariga stated.

Beyond the disputed voting procedure, the affected officials have raised concerns over alleged impersonation and unauthorised representation during the SGM.

They argue that the exclusion of legitimate Congress delegates, coupled with the participation of individuals allegedly lacking proper mandates, raises serious questions about the authenticity of the attendance register, the legitimacy of the quorum and whether the constitutionally prescribed voting threshold was attained.

In outlining their next course of action, Mariga and the affected NEC members have declared that they will not recognise the dismissal resolutions, maintaining that their constitutional mandates cannot be extinguished through a process they consider unlawful.

They have called upon FIFA, CAF and the Sports Registrar to urgently scrutinise the Meru proceedings, including delegate credentials, attendance records, quorum and the voting process.

The group has also reserved the right to pursue all available constitutional remedies to challenge the resolutions.

Insisting that their position is not about protecting individual positions but safeguarding FKF as an institution, Mariga maintained that the events in Meru would not intimidate or silence the affected officials

“Our position has never been about protecting individual positions. It is about safeguarding FKF as an institution and defending the constitutional rights of its members,” he said.