The tough questions on Gachagua's impeachment process
National
By
Kamau Muthoni
| May 14, 2026
When High Court Judges sit to determine the cases filed to challenge former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s impeachment, they will have to wheat whittle chaff to answer emerging tough questions lingering about the whole process.
Critical to the case is the question about Gachagua’s health status during the impeachment in the Senate.
Karen Hospital CEO and cardiologist Dr Daniel Gikonyo explained that Democracy for the Citizens Party (DCP) leader was ailing and required a medical check-up.
On the other hand, Senate, the National Assembly, the Attorney General and the impeachment mover argued that he pulled a health card to scuttle the process. Nevertheless, they alleged that his lawyers questioned Mutuse, filed replies to the allegations and submissions.
READ MORE
Kenya eyes green finance to boost climate-smart construction
Westgate Mall bets on improved security, new activities to up foot traffic
Co-op Bank posts Sh8.41 billion profit amid tough economy
Transporters turn to tech to stop fuel theft
Why you could start paying less for electricity
Mwalimu Sacco eyes informal sector financing with KNCCI pact
Africa's skills crisis blocking development capital, PMI warns ahead of summit
Future of art, technology and Kenya's creative economy in job creation
Tala strengthens customer ID checks to protect borrowers from fraud
Government opens up power sector to competition, reduces KPLC monopoly
Closely tied to this is whether Gachagua got a fair hearing and whether time at the Senate is cast in stone, such that the upper house could adjourn to allow him the three days the doctor recommended for a checkup.
His lawyer Paul Muite told High Court Judges Eric Ogola, Freda Mugambi and Anthony Mrima that Senators had a pre-determined outcome, and the only thing they wanted to do was get done with it.
He asserted that Senate speaker Amason Kingi misled the house by informing on the time allocated to hear and detertime a motion.
According to Muite, the time the plenary took was meant for the committee.
On the other hand, Senate’s lawyer Prof Tom Ojienda argued that the clock starts ticking when the motion is tabled. According to him, the only time Senators are allowed to rise is when a determination is made either defeating the motion or for impeachment.
Further, the case boils down to whether Senate was required to subject the motion to a committee. Gachagua argues that it is mandatory to do so. On the other hand, Attorney General’s lawyer Prof Githu Muigai is of the view that the standing orders and the Constitution give senators a discretion to decide whether to subject a motion to a committee or the floor of the house.
The other lingering but tough question is on the charges against him.The
Senate impeached Gachagua on five grounds. His lawyers argued that on the first ground of alleged partisan and divisive politics, he ought to have been subjected to a criminal process, after which Parliament should have considered whether to kick him out or not.
Nonetheless, his team accused MPs of pulling a spec from Gachagua’s eye while having logs in theirs. They argued that President William Ruto was allegedly also a proponent of shareholding politics and Members of Parliament were the choire masters of tribal politics in the country.
According to Gachagua’s team, the impeachment had nothing to do with the allegation but the bitter political fallout between him and his boss.
On the other hand, Senate and National Assembly insisted that Gachagua played divisive politics, against the National Cohesion and Integration law. They claimed that he painted Kenya Kwanza administration as having animals that were more equal than others.
On the other grounds, Gachagua argued that they were based on an obsolete law which had been declared unconstitutional by the High Court and were tied at the hip. He asserted that even with that, the Senate did not probe the claims to ascertain the truth.
The other question will be whether there was a rush to discard Gachagua and replace him with Kithure Kindiki. According to him, Parliament and government agencies were swift that day, with the clearances being done in the night. However, he questioned how the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission cleared Kindiki without having commissioners.
The last issue that judges will burn the midnight oil to settle is whether Speakers Amason Kingi and Moses Wetangula ought to have supervised the impeachment process as principal members of the Kenya Kwanza Coalition government.