NAIROBI, Kenya — Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua was absent from court on Monday as a three-judge bench delivered its highly anticipated ruling on petitions challenging his impeachment from office, bringing a major chapter in one of Kenya’s most significant constitutional disputes to a close.
The bench comprising Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Murima, and Freda Mugambi rejected an application seeking to postpone delivery of the judgment and proceeded with the ruling as scheduled.
The request for adjournment had been made by lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui, representing petitioner Enock Aura, whose case was among several consolidated petitions challenging Gachagua’s removal from office.
The case arises from events of October 2024, when Gachagua became the first Deputy President in Kenya’s history to be removed from office through the constitutional impeachment process. The National Assembly voted to impeach him on October 8, 2024, before the Senate upheld the decision on October 17 after considering 11 charges.
The accusations fell into three broad categories: gross violation of the Constitution, commission of crimes under national and international law, and gross misconduct.
Parliament accused Gachagua of violating constitutional provisions on integrity, accountability, leadership, public service, and the rule of law. He was also accused of undermining governance and devolution, interfering with judicial independence, and failing to meet the standards required under Chapter Six of the Constitution.
Other allegations involved claims that he breached the National Cohesion and Integration Act through remarks considered divisive, engaged in corruption-related conduct, and accumulated unexplained wealth amounting to Sh5.2 billion within a two-year period. Lawmakers further accused him of misleading the public and engaging in conduct incompatible with the office of Deputy President.
Although the National Assembly approved all 11 grounds, the Senate ultimately upheld five charges. These included findings linked to his controversial “shareholding” remarks, alleged ethnic incitement, violations of national cohesion laws, attacks on the Judiciary and conduct deemed to have undermined the National Intelligence Service.
In court, Gachagua argued that he had been denied a fair opportunity to defend himself before the Senate because he was hospitalised during part of the impeachment proceedings. He later abandoned efforts aimed at reinstatement and instead pursued compensation and restoration of benefits attached to the office.
The former Deputy President is seeking more than Sh80 million in compensation, including salary and gratuity for the remainder of the term he did not serve, retirement benefits, a monthly pension, medical cover, security, official vehicles, diplomatic passports, and other privileges available to former holders of the office.
The court’s decision is expected to shape future interpretation of impeachment proceedings under the Constitution and clarify the rights and benefits available to senior state officers removed from office through parliamentary processes.
The ruling also represents a significant test of the constitutional balance between Parliament’s impeachment powers and the Judiciary’s role in reviewing the legality and fairness of such proceedings.
