Doctor defends Gachagua, denies he was hiding

Cardiologist Daniel Kibuka Gikonyo and lawyer Faith Waigwa at the Milimani court for cross-examination during former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua's case over his impeachment on May 13, 2026. [David Gichuru,Standard]

Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s health turned out to be the central controversy, with heated exchanges on his status during the impeachment proceedings before the Senate playing out in public yesterday.

Karen Hospital CEO and cardiologist Dr Daniel Gikonyo took the witness stand to defend his position that Gachagua would have suffered a fatal attack if he had remained before the upper house to defend himself.

Armed with a stethoscope on his shoulders and unending humour, the senior doctor asserted that the former DP had been admitted ill, adding that President William Ruto was among the many callers who rang him to inquire about the health status of the then second in command.

“I must be honest enough to specify that I did receive a call from our president asking about the status of the patient (Rigathi Gachagua), and I responded accordingly,” testified Dr. Gikonyo.

Rigathi’s successor, Kithure Kindiki’s lawyer Dr Muthomi Thiankolu, pressed the doctor on the accuracy of his medical record, and Gikonyo pushed back.

At one point, the medical doctor sought permission from High Court Judges Eric Ogola, Freda Mugambi and Anthony to laugh at a question by the law doctor that Gachagua allegedly hid as his hospital to evade impeachment proceedings.

“I put it to you this gentleman was in your hospital to hide away from the Senate. He was not sick,” paused Thiankolu.

Just as Gachagua’s lawyer, Paul Muite, was about to raise an objection against Thiankolu’s line of questioning, the senior doctor sparked an outburst in court.

“Let me laugh a little bit first…” he said amidst a hearty laughter.

Thiankolu, who had put a serious face, followed that he too had been laughing about it.

The doctor apologised to the court, still laughing, but Justice Ogola added more fire to the laughter wood, causing Gikonyo to now remove his eyeglasses, a show that he was now flat out.

He then calmed down and asserted that although his affidavit was filed a year and a half after impeachment, he had no dog in the fight, adding that there was medical evidence to show Gachagua was genuinely unwell.

“But honestly, sir, if a question arises as to those documents that have been raised, they are available and if you are looking for justice and honesty, you can ask me, and I can provide them, and they take two seconds, and they are here… I am here clearly to answer questions concerning a medical issue, not a court matter. My understanding is that I am here to respond to medical questions about the petitioner’s treatment in the hospital,” he said.

The doctor was hard-pressed to explain why in the documents, Gachagua was being referred with his initials. He stated that to maintain the privacy of some of his prominent patients, it was Karen Hospital’s procedure to redact the identity. He, however, stated that the mobile number of his patient had been clearly indicated in the document.

“Now that you have finished laughing, was Rigathi Gachagua sick or not sick, was Rigathi Gachagua sick or not sick, were you hiding him in your hospital?” Senior lawyer Muite followed up.

The doctor replied: “I laughed because I thought it was not a serious question, because maybe it is not common sense. The answer was yes, he was sick. We admitted him. We have data that is available to any medical person. We have medical reports, we have his traces of his ECG, lab data, that is available on demand by this court.”

 In the meantime, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) admitted that it had no commissioners but insisted that it could function with a secretariat.

 The commission claimed that it had no role in determining the viability of Kindiki. It claimed that responding to the inquiry by Ruto about his suitability was just responding to a status and had nothing to do with clearing Kindiki.

It argued that only the President and the National Assembly had a role in clearing the nominee for swearing in.

The National Assembly and  Senate also replied that Gachagua was given a chance to argue his case to the end.

Gachagua, they said, was impeached by the Senate on five grounds.

Senators and MPs claimed that Gachagua had metaphorically raised inflammatory statements that the government was a dairy cow, with those who tended it deserving to milk it first. According to them, this was a crude analogy of reducing citizenship to transactional shareholding.

At the same they claimed that his reference to ‘children of the home and those of neighbours' allegedly created a dangerous hierarchy of citizenship.

Further, they told the court that he repeatedly contradicted Ruto, which allegedly amounted to insubordination.

MPs and Senators also claimed that Gachagua interfered with Nairobi County’s City Market planning and had disparaging remarks against governors.

The other issue was that he allegedly publicly attacked Justice Esther Maina for ordering the forfeiture of Sh 200 million as proceeds of corruption.

“ Because the members of the National Assembly and Senate are not required to give a reason why they are voting the way they did, what would be the test of unreasonableness? From a political sense, what is left is the people saying that a specific member of the National Assembly did not express our will. Either you deal with him this way. The constitution says you deal with him during re-election or through a recall,” argued National Assembly’s lawyer Eric Ngumbo.

According to them, an impeachment is a constitutional process but with a political character.

The two houses asserted that there is no legitimate expectation that once a deputy president is elected, his fate is tied to that of the President.

They argued that a DP can be removed at any time.

The two houses of Parliament said that, following public participation, without his response to the public, and hearing, there was an inevitable conclusion of impeachment.

They urged the court to dismiss the cases, adding that even for pension and retirement benefits, Gachagua could only get them if he retired after completion of the term.

Gachagua wants the court to find that the impeachment was unconstitutional, hence null and void. He is seeking full benefits, alongside compensation

Further, the mover of the motion, Mwengi Mutuse, claimed that a committee route would lead to bias, adding that Gachagua ought to have pushed for the plenary process.

Senior lawyer Tom Ojienda asserted that once impeached by Senate, even on trivial grounds, then the fate of a president or deputy president is sealed.