Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua will learn his destiny on June 8, when the High Court will deliver a verdict in consolidated petitions contesting his October 2024 impeachment.
The petitions before the court question the constitutionality and legality of Gachagua’s removal from office by the National Assembly and the Senate, after an impeachment process that has generated numerous legal challenges.
“We will retire and prepare a judgment bringing these proceedings to a close. We intend to do that on June 8 in the ceremonial hall at 11 am,” Justice Eric Ogolla announced.
Gachagua is requesting, among other remedies, compensation equal to the salary and benefits he would have received had he finished his five-year term starting from his 2022 election.
He also seeks a declaration that his impeachment was unconstitutional and illegal.
His legal team has asserted that the impeachment process was tainted by procedural defects, which they describe as a denial of a fair hearing and an excessively rushed process.
They also contend that the requirement for adequate public participation was not properly satisfied, rendering the entire process invalid.
The proceedings have featured intense courtroom debates involving numerous lawyers representing Gachagua, Parliament, the Senate, and other parties of interest, including Deputy President Kithure Kindiki.
The hearing, which lasted five days, has occasionally been characterized by sharp exchanges, sarcasm, laughter, and lighthearted moments despite the gravity of the issues under discussion.
At the heart of Gachagua’s case is the assertion that he was not given adequate opportunity to defend himself during the impeachment motion.
His lawyers argue that constitutional protections were not fully respected, and that the rapid pace of the process undermined fairness.
The issue of his medical condition also surfaced during the proceedings, with debates about whether he was physically capable of participating in Senate proceedings at the time of impeachment.
His doctor, Dr Daniel Gikonyo, testified and was cross-examined as the court sought to determine if illness prevented Gachagua from fully engaging in the process.
Nevertheless, the respondents rejected these claims, maintaining that the impeachment was conducted in compliance with constitutional and legal requirements.
They insisted that Gachagua received a fair hearing and was represented by legal counsel throughout the process.
Deputy President Kithure Kindiki’s legal team further contended that claims of illness were employed as a pretext to avoid Senate cross-examination, a position strongly challenged by Gachagua’s doctor, who affirmed that the former Deputy President was genuinely ill and receiving medical treatment.
Parliament and the Senate have also defended the impeachment process, maintaining that it occurred within constitutional timeframes and followed proper procedure.
They argued that comprehensive public participation was conducted through various channels and that the process met legal standards.
The Senate additionally asserted that certain evidence introduced during court proceedings, including the doctor’s testimony, was not part of the impeachment record and should not be factored into determining the legality of the process.
The consolidated petition has attracted considerable public attention, owing to the political ramifications of the case and its importance in establishing benchmarks for impeachment procedures in Kenya.
As the three-judge bench led by Presiding Judge Eric Ogola, with Freda Mugambi and Anthony Mrima, prepares to deliver its judgment, focus now shifts to whether the court will validate the impeachment or deem it unconstitutional, potentially restoring Gachagua’s claim for compensation and benefits.
Currently, attention is fixed on June 8, when the High Court will bring the impeachment dispute to a definitive conclusion.