Wednesday morning, May 13, former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua arrived at the Milimani High Court for the continuation of his landmark petition challenging his historic impeachment in October 2024.
Accompanied by his wife, Pastor Dorcas Rigathi, Gachagua is seeking to nullify the parliamentary process that removed him from office, arguing it was flawed, politically motivated, and unconstitutional.
The three-judge bench is hearing consolidated petitions, with today’s proceedings focusing on cross-examination of witnesses, including Dr. Daniel Gikonyo, and arguments over procedural fairness during the original impeachment.
Gachagua’s legal team highlighted the absence of medical evidence presented to the Senate regarding his health at the time, asserting that Parliament proceeded without proper regard for his condition.
In October 2024, following a fallout with President William Ruto, the National Assembly passed a motion with 281 votes in favor, accusing Gachagua of 11 charges, including gross misconduct, corruption, ethnic incitement, and undermining the government and President.
The Senate upheld the motion, making Gachagua the first Deputy President removed under Kenya’s 2010 Constitution.
Gachagua and co-petitioners have described the process as a “parliamentary coup” engineered to manage Mt. Kenya politics. Lawyers argue that Parliament acted as a tool of the Executive, denying fair hearing and public participation.
They point to rushed proceedings and a lack of due process, especially given Gachagua’s reported hospitalization during key Senate sessions.
The petitioners further claim the impeachment was politically motivated to settle scores after Gachagua’s fallout with the administration, reducing complex constitutional issues to simple yes/no votes.
During court proceedings, a Cardiologist at the Karen hospital, Dr. Daniel Gikonyo, revealed that President William Ruto personally called him on October 17, 2024 while Gachagua was admitted to inquire on his medical condition.
Dr. Hikonyo told the court that he provided the president with general information that Gachagua had been admitted following complainant’s of severe chest pains and that medics were still carrying out tests.
In a cross examination, dr. Hikonyo informed the court that he acted within the medical practice and professional ethics reiterating that confidentiality and consent remained paramount.
” I had to seek clearance from the patient, which he granted.”
The court previously admitted a supplementary affidavit from Gachagua’s side detailing his illness, marking an early procedural win for the petitioners.
Gachagua’s team is pushing for the impeachment resolutions to be declared null and void.
They have referenced comparative jurisprudence, including a recent South African Constitutional Court decision on presidential impeachment.
The respondents in the petition have maintained that the Gachagua’s impeachment was accorded a fair hearing and that the process complied with constitutional requirements.
