The High Court has upheld the Senate’s decision to impeach former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, dismissing several consolidated petitions that sought to overturn his removal from office.
In a landmark judgment delivered on Monday, June 8, 2026, a three-judge bench comprising Justices Eric Ogolla, Anthony Murima, and Lady Justice Fridah Mugambi ruled that Parliament acted within the law during the impeachment process and that the proceedings met constitutional requirements.
The judges found that allegations claiming Parliament lacked the authority to consider the impeachment due to the failure to fully implement the two-thirds gender principle were without merit.
Also Read
According to the court, the issue of gender representation did not deprive Parliament of its constitutional mandate to consider and determine impeachment proceedings against Gachagua.
The bench further upheld the validity of the Parliamentary Standing Orders that guided the impeachment process, finding that the procedures adopted by both the National Assembly and the Senate were lawful and constitutional.
On the question of public participation, the court ruled that the National Assembly conducted the exercise in accordance with constitutional requirements, providing citizens with an opportunity to express their views on the impeachment motion.
The judges also dismissed claims that the Speakers of the National Assembly and Senate, Members of Parliament, and Senators were biased during the impeachment proceedings.
The court held that the petitioners failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the allegations.
“The mere fact that legislators belong to particular political parties, hold political views or have publicly expressed opinions on an impeachment matter does not, by itself, constitute constitutional bias or invalidate impeachment proceedings,” Justice Eric Ogolla stated in the judgment.
In a significant aspect of the ruling, the court also upheld the appointment of Deputy President Kithure Kindiki, rejecting arguments that the absence of commissioners at the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) rendered the succession process unconstitutional.
However, the judges found that Gachagua’s constitutional right to a fair hearing was violated during the Senate trial.
The court cited procedural irregularities, particularly the Senate’s decision to proceed with the proceedings despite his absence and its refusal to grant an adjournment.
According to the judgment, these actions denied the former Deputy President sufficient opportunity to effectively present his defense, amounting to an infringement of his fair trial rights.
As a result, the court awarded Gachagua Ksh50 million in damages, payable by the Senate, for the violation of his constitutional rights.
“The prayer seeking to quash the resolution of the Senate to impeach Gachagua is hereby declined. A declaratory order is hereby issued that Gachagua’s fair trial rights were infringed when the Senate declined to allow an adjournment in the impeachment proceedings despite his absence,” Justice Ogolla ruled.
Despite finding that his rights had been violated, the court maintained that the infringement was not sufficient to invalidate the impeachment outcome. Consequently, Gachagua’s removal from office remains in force.
The judgment marks the conclusion of one of Kenya’s most significant constitutional and political cases in recent years, affirming Parliament’s authority in impeachment proceedings while simultaneously underscoring the importance of safeguarding the right to a fair hearing.
The ruling is expected to spark political and legal debate, particularly regarding the balance between parliamentary processes and the protection of constitutional rights during impeachment proceedings