Former Kenyan Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua Seeks to Overturn Supreme Court Appeal in Impeachment Case
Nairobi, Kenya — Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has approached the Supreme Court to dismiss an appeal challenging the formation of the High Court bench handling impeachment-related petitions. The move comes as Gachagua argues that the appeal has become irrelevant due to recent legal developments, rendering it moot and non-adjustable.
In a preliminary objection filed through his legal team, Kamotho Njomo & Company Advocates, Gachagua contends that the constitutional dispute over bench composition has already been resolved. The issue centers on whether the Deputy Chief Justice had the authority to empanel judges under Article 165(4) of the Constitution. This matter was effectively settled after Chief Justice Martha Koome reconstituted the bench in compliance with a Court of Appeal ruling.
On May 9, 2025, the Court of Appeal nullified orders issued by the Deputy Chief Justice assigning judges to hear the impeachment petitions. The appellate court directed that the Chief Justice should properly reconstitute the bench in line with constitutional provisions. Following this ruling, Chief Justice Koome appointed a three-judge bench comprising Justices Eric Ogolla, Anthony Mrima, and Freda Mugambi.
Gachagua argues that all parties involved have since accepted the jurisdiction of the reconstituted bench, filed their submissions, and extensively argued their cases. He maintains that any intervention by the Supreme Court at this stage would serve no practical purpose and could disrupt ongoing proceedings.
“The question of bench composition is moot and no longer a live dispute between the parties,” Gachagua’s submissions state. They further emphasize that any determination by the apex court would amount to an advisory opinion on an abstract constitutional question, rather than addressing a practical legal issue.
The former Deputy President also highlights the importance of safeguarding the stability of the already constituted bench. He asserts that public interest lies in ensuring the smooth continuation of the impeachment proceedings rather than reopening debates over the bench’s formation.
In support of the Court of Appeal’s findings, Gachagua reiterates that the authority to empanel judges under Article 165(4) rests exclusively with the Chief Justice. While the Deputy Chief Justice may exercise this authority in exceptional circumstances, such as the death, resignation, or removal of the Chief Justice, Gachagua maintains that such conditions were not met in this case.
He further rejects claims that empanelment is merely an administrative task, arguing that assigning judges to hear constitutional matters is fundamentally a judicial function anchored in Article 159 of the Constitution.
The legal dispute stems from appeals linked to impeachment petitions filed against Gachagua, who has faced efforts to remove him from office. These cases are currently pending before High Courts in Nairobi and Kerugoya.
As the Supreme Court considers Gachagua’s application, the case underscores the delicate balance between constitutional interpretation and the practicalities of judicial proceedings. The outcome could have significant implications for Kenya’s legal framework and the handling of high-profile impeachment cases in the future.
— Reported by Nexio News
