Gachagua was failed mostly by those close to him

Former Deputy Ptresident Rigathi Gachagua's lawyer Tom Wachira making his submissions during the second day of hearing of an impeachment motion at the Senate chambers on October 17, 2024. [Elvis Ogina, Standard]  

The tribulations of ousted Deputy President Rigathi Gachagwa will go down as one of those singular moments in our political history.

His real political sin was trying to build his own political base in Mt Kenya independent of President William Ruto and his supporters. The official charges of abuse of office, corruption and incitement of ethnic tensions were mere means to an end. 

There will be time in future to write about other aspects of Gachagua’s ordeal. For today, I would like to focus on the competent show we were treated to by his team of lawyers on Wednesday.

First, most reasonable Kenyans who watched were convinced beyond doubt that the cross-examination poked giant holes into the prosecution’s arguments. It makes no sense that Parliament chose to go after Gachagua for the same crimes allegedly committed by none other than President William Ruto.

In addition to rebutting the specifics of the charges, Gachagua’s lawyers presented a strong case outlining why he is not uniquely bad. His behaviour is typical of the entire class. Which is to say this entire process is an indictment of the entire political class. 

Second, the performance of Gachagua’s team illustrated that Kenyan politicians are fairly capable of hiring competent professionals when they need to.

Unfortunately for the Deputy President, this epiphany came a little late in the game. Why did he not hire competent political strategists and advisers before he took office?

Why did he not have communication professionals to help him package his speeches in ways that were less offensive to reason? How did his team not anticipate, from a game theoretic perspective, what would happen after he helped William Ruto win the presidency? 

These are important questions whose variations could be asked of most of our politicians. Many simply muddle through their public duties and political careers without care for professionalism or expertise. Expediency is their dominant mode. 

Unfortunately for all of us, the love of expediency among the ruling elite is a millstone of mediocrity around our collective necks. They do not take policymaking seriously. They do not take institution-building and rule of law seriously.

They do not care about personal decorum and societal stability. And when they inevitably fail, we are the ones who get forced to bear the high cost of their mediocrity. 

It is fine and proper that Gachagua faced the consequences for his choices. Our collective wish is that it would have been better if the entire political class did, too. 

The writer is a professor at Georgetown University