Court rejects 19 petitions, clears path for Gachagua impeachment

In his comprehensive 144-page petition, DP Rigathi Gachagua sought to stop the process of his ouster, contending that the impending impeachment motion, tabled in Parliament, undermines his constitutional rights and is an act of political persecution. [DPCS]

Attempts by embattled Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua to salvage his position through 19 petitions have hit a dead end after the High Court declined to issue orders to block Parliament proceedings slated for today (Tuesday).

The 19 petitions, including those from Gachagua and his close ally Cleophas Malala, failed to secure a conservatory order from eleven judges across the country, barring MPs from impeaching the second in command.

Petitions were all aimed at halting Gachagua’s imminent impeachment and focus on several key constitutional violations, including a lack of proper public participation and allegations of bias.

The petitioners who filed case in various courts including Milimani, Nyahururu and Kerugoya contend that both the National Assembly and the Senate have failed to meet the constitutional requirement for two-thirds gender representation, further undermining the legitimacy of the intended impeachment motion.

Yesterday, Justice Bahati Mwamuye of Milimani High Court declined a second attempt by Malala to prohibit Parliament from discussing the conduct of the DP pending the determination of his petition two days after Justice Richard Mwonyo on Friday declined a similar plea by Jane Njeri Maina, the Woman Representative for Kirinyaga County.

Instead, Justice Mwamuye allowed a request by National Assembly and speaker Moses Wetang’ula and the Senate to refer the matter to the High Court principal judge Chacha Mwita for directions on whether the 19 petitions challenging the impeachment of Gachagua will be consolidated or not.

While referring the matter of Malala to the principal judge, Mwamuye noted that there are 18 other matters filed in different courts in the republic seeking to halt the impeachment process, and would be paramount that the matters be heard together to avoid conflicting decisions.

“This court has noted that there are several other matters revolving around the same issue. The court finds merit in having this matter listed before the principal judge of the High Court of Kenya for directions,” said Justice Mwamuye  

“The file on the Malala case is listed before the principal judge forthwith. The honorable Principal Judge may give directions on this and possibly any other matter of similar nature regarding the same subject. In light of these directions, this court declines to issue conservatory orders at this stage; such orders may be available for issuance if this court or any other court finds merit,” he added.

The direction to consolidate the matters was made by lawyer Paul Nyamondi, representing the National Assembly.

“I want to bring to the court’s attention that subsequent to the filing of the petition by Hon. Malala, 18 other related matters have been filed throughout the Republic of Kenya. They are related because they each challenge the impeachment process of Gachagua. The National Assembly is listed as the first respondent in all 18 petitions, including this one, the 19th,” Nyamondi submitted.

The National Assembly urged that all 19 lawsuits be heard together to avoid the risk of having multiple determinations regarding Gachagua’s impeachment at the interlocutory stage.

Nyamondi emphasised that the application for consolidation was far more important than the petitioners’ request for interim relief to halt MPs from discussing the motion to remove Gachagua.

Wetang’ula, through lawyer Kuyioni Josphat, vehemently opposed the issuance of orders barring him and MPs from discussing Gachagua’s conduct, stating that the issue of consolidating the cases should take precedence.

“The Speaker of the National Assembly is a party to the 19 petitions, and we face the same predicament as the National Assembly. We believe that the issue of consolidation should take precedence over any interim orders,” Kuyioni told Justice Mwamuye.

Malala, through lawyer Mwenda Njagi, mounted a spirited defense to secure a court order suspending the impeachment debate. Njagi urged the court to halt the impeachment proceedings, arguing that if they proceeded, the cases would be rendered an academic exercise.

“Your Lordship, the process expected to take place on Tuesday is illegal as it violates the two-thirds gender rule. We urge you to issue conservatory orders to bar this process,” Njagi pleaded. 

In the case filed by Gachagua, Malala and Sheria Mtaani and several individuals, eleven led by judges Chacha, Mwamuye and Lawrence Mugambi in their separate rulings rejected prayers to prevent MPs and Senators from debating the motion.

In his comprehensive 144-page petition, Gachagua sought to stop the process of his ouster, contending that the impending impeachment motion, tabled in Parliament, undermines his constitutional rights and is an act of political persecution.

“The intended impeachment process against me essentially seeks to overturn the sovereign will of the majority of Kenyans who voted for me as Deputy President in the August 2022 presidential election,” Gachagua asserts.

He emphasises that the grounds for impeachment are frivolous and do not meet the legal standards required for such a serious action.

The DP has also criticised Speaker Wetangula and his deputy Gladys Shollei for bias, pointing to their public comments about his fate.

Gachagua claims that the leadership of the National Assembly, including key figures supportive of the impeachment motion, cannot be trusted to facilitate a fair public participation exercise.

“Only an independent and impartial body can conduct such an exercise,” he laments.

In his petition, Malala argued that the current composition of the National Assembly and the Senate is unlawful and lacks the constitutional mandate to engage in impeachment discussions.

“This ongoing violation delegitimizes any actions taken by Parliament, including motions for impeachment,” Lawyer Njagi says.