Gachagua now seeks to block Senate from impeachment hearing

Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has filed a fresh case seeking orders to prohibit the Senate from proceeding with his impeachment hearing scheduled for next week 

In an application filed under a certificate of urgency, Gachagua seeks orders restraining the Senate from acting on the National Assembly's ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/politics/article/2001504431/messy-divorce-billions-at-centre-of-gachagua-ruto-fallout">resolution to impeach him.<

The court papers state, "Pending the hearing and determination of the substantive petition herein, a conservatory order should be issued restraining and prohibiting the Senate from proceeding with the impeachment hearing scheduled for October 16, 17, and 18, 2024, based on the resolution passed by the National Assembly on October 8, 2024, founded on the notice of motion dated September 28, 2024."

Gachagua argues that the motion discussed on October 8, 2024, was debated by MPs to unrelated to the original allegations, transforming the impeachment into what he describes as a "vicarious assault" rather than a lawful examination of his conduct as a public servant.

In his petition, Gachagua expresses grave concerns over the integrity of the National Assembly's proceedings, claiming that he was denied a fair hearing.

He alleges that MPs faced intimidation and undue influence, which compromised the ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/national/article/2001504412/why-high-court-referred-gachagua-petitions-to-cj-koome">legitimacy of the motion<.

He asserts that the rushed nature of the impeachment process suggests an intention to circumvent judicial oversight, allowing the proceedings to unfold without proper constitutional scrutiny.

Gachagua's lawyer, Kamotho Njomo, highlights that the National Assembly’s focus on whether the Deputy President had offended the President, rather than any constitutional violations, demonstrates a misuse of the impeachment process.

"The impeachment appears to serve political ends rather than uphold constitutional fidelity," Njomo states.

Gachagua's legal team contends that the impeachment proceedings have devolved from legitimate constitutional concerns into a personal attack against him and his family.

Further complicating the matter, Gachagua claims that the motion violates the legal doctrine of exhaustion, indicating that other remedies should have been pursued before resorting to impeachment.

He argues that using Article 145 for political retribution constitutes an abuse of power.

Additionally, Gachagua criticises the National Assembly for trivialising the standards of gross misconduct that are supposed to guide the ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001504443/gachagua-ouster-raises-important-legal-questions?utm_cmp_rs=amp-next-page#google_vignette">impeachment process<.

He warns that the criteria for removal have been lowered to such an extent that ordinary personal conduct such as inheriting property or expressing opinions could be grounds for dismissal from public office.

Gachagua accuses Speaker Moses Wetang'ula and Deputy Speaker Boss Shollei of taking a partisan position against him before, during, and after the tabling of the impeachment motion, violating Articles 47 and 50.

"In light of the foregoing, unless the court grants urgent conservatory orders, the subject matter of this petition will be rendered moot, nugatory, and an academic exercise," lawyer Njomo concludes.