NAIROBI, Kenya — Ex-DP Rigathi Gachagua will know the fate of his legal challenge against his October 2024 impeachment on June 8 after the High Court set a date for judgment in the consolidated petitions contesting his removal from office.
The three-judge bench comprising Eric Ogolla, Freda Mugambi, and Anthony Mrima announced that the ruling will be delivered at the ceremonial hall at 11 am.
“We will retire and prepare a judgment bringing these proceedings to a close. We hope to do that on June 8 in the ceremonial hall at 11 am,” Justice Ogolla stated.
Gachagua Seeks Compensation
Gachagua is seeking declarations that his impeachment by the National Assembly of Kenya and the Senate of Kenya was unconstitutional and unlawful.
The former Deputy President is also seeking compensation equivalent to the salary, allowances, and benefits he would have earned had he completed his five-year term after being elected in 2022.
His legal team argued that the impeachment process violated constitutional safeguards and denied him a fair hearing.
The lawyers further claimed that the process was rushed and lacked adequate public participation, rendering it legally defective.
Medical Condition Emerges in Proceedings
A major issue during the hearings was Gachagua’s health during the Senate impeachment proceedings.
His doctor, Daniel Gikonyo, testified before the court and maintained that Gachagua was genuinely ill and under medical care at the time.
The doctor’s testimony was subjected to cross-examination as the court sought to determine whether illness prevented Gachagua from effectively participating in the Senate proceedings.
However, lawyers representing Kithure Kindiki argued that claims of illness were being used to avoid Senate scrutiny and cross-examination.
Parliament Defends Impeachment
Parliament and the Senate defended the impeachment process, insisting that it fully complied with constitutional and legal requirements.
The respondents argued that Gachagua was represented by legal counsel and was accorded an opportunity to defend himself throughout the proceedings.
They also maintained that public participation requirements were satisfied through multiple engagement platforms.
The Senate further argued that some evidence introduced during the court hearings, including parts of the medical testimony, was not part of the official impeachment record and should not influence the court’s determination.
