High Court declines to stop ongoing process to oust Rigathi Gachagua, pro-DP cases pile up
Lawmakers acknowledge that supporting the impeachment of Rigathi Gachagua could have severe repercussions in the upcoming 2027 elections, with some calling for unity and dialogue instead of division.
What you need to know:
- Mr Gachagua described the process as a “choreographed political lynching designed to defeat the sovereign will of the Kenyan people”, and prematurely ended, for all time, his long and productive career as a public servant.
- “The intended impeachment process against the petitioner essentially seeks to overturn the sovereign will of the majority of people of Kenya who voted for him to be the Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya, on frivolous grounds which do not meet the lawful test which justifies an impeachment,” he said.
A fresh attempt to arrest the ongoing process to impeach Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has been declined by the High Court.
Instead, Justice Bahati Mwamuye on Monday directed the case filed by former United Democratic Alliance (UDA)Secretary-General, Cleophas Malala, be taken to Principal Judge Eric Ogola for hearing of an application for consolidation of all the petitions regarding the impending ouster.
Through lawyer Mwenda Njagi, Mr Malala submitted that the case would be rendered useless as the National Assembly is set to hear the motion on Tuesday.
The lawyer said the petition would be rendered an academic exercise if the orders sought were not granted.
“This court has noted that there are several petitions regarding the impeachment process. This court finds merit in the application for consolidation. I hereby direct that the file be placed to the principal judge forthwith, for further directions. Given the foregoing, the court declines to issue any conservatory orders,” said the judge.
Through lawyer Paul Nyamodi, Parliament revealed that a total of 19 petitions challenging Mr Gachagua’s impeachment had so far been filed.
The lawyer said consolidating all the matters would facilitate the efficient and expeditious disposal of the petitions, and provide a framework for a fair and impartial dispensation of justice to all the parties.
“The order for consolidation is in the interest of justice and protects the High Court sitting differently or separately from embarrassment if it proceeds to hear and determine the petitions separately as it may arrive at different and conflicting conclusions on same or similar issues,” the clerk of National Assembly Samuel Njoroge said.
He added that the consolidation of the petitions would be in the best interest of justice and the efficient administration of the court system, and would save judicial time and resources if a single determination were made on all the related matters.
The application for consolidation was supported by the Senate.
In his petition, Mr Malala argues that Parliament, as presently constituted, is unconstitutional, over the failure to meet the one-third gender rule set out in Article 27(8) and Article 81(b) of the Constitution.
Other than Malala’s petition, Mr Gachagua has also challenged his planned ouster, arguing that the motion to impeach him was entirely founded on deceit, misrepresentations, and suppression of material facts.
The DP further said the public participation that was initiated by Parliament was not enough to ‘overturn the sovereign will of the people’, who voted for him and President William Ruto in the last general election.
Mr Gachagua described the process as a “choreographed political lynching designed to defeat the sovereign will of the Kenyan people”, and prematurely ended, for all time, his long and productive career as a public servant.
“The intended impeachment process against the petitioner essentially seeks to overturn the sovereign will of the majority of people of Kenya who voted for him to be the Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya, on frivolous grounds which do not meet the lawful test which justifies an impeachment,” he said.
