The High Court of Kenya has declined to issue an interim order that would have halted the impeachment process against Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.
On Monday, September 30, 2024, allies of Deputy President Gachagua, spearheaded by former United Democratic Alliance (UDA) Secretary General Cleophas Malala, rushed to court in a bid to prevent the tabling and debate of the impeachment motion scheduled for the following day in the National Assembly.
The urgency of the matter was evident in the court documents, which stated:
“Before this Court is the Certificate of Urgency dated 30/09/2024 signed by the Counsel Peter Mwenda Njagi, the Chamber Summons dated 30/09/2024, and the Supporting Affidavit of the Petitioner/Applicant, Cleophas Wakhungu Malalah, dated 30/09/2024; all of which were filed alongside a Petition dated 30/09/2024.”
Also Read: What Does The Constitution Say About Impeachment of a Deputy President?
Questioning Constitutional Legitimacy
Malala’s legal team, led by lawyer Mwenda Njagi, presented an argument in their attempt to halt the impeachment proceedings. Their primary contentions were:
1. A request for the court to issue orders preventing the tabling, debating, considering, or acting upon any motion for the removal of or sanctions against the Deputy President.
2. An assertion that both the National Assembly and the Senate were “unlawfully constituted” and therefore lacked the legal authority to debate the impeachment.
The court documents elaborated on this second point:
“The basis advanced by the Petitioner/Applicant is that the 1st and 2nd Respondents, the National Assembly and the Senate respectively, are allegedly unconstitutional in terms of their composition due to an alleged failure by the respondents (National Assembly and Senate), jointly and severally, to meet the constitutional requirements regarding the ‘no more than two-thirds gender rule’ set out under Article 27(8) and Article 81(b) of the Constitution.”
The Court’s Decision
High Court Judge Bahati Mwamuye, while acknowledging the urgency of the matter, stopped short of granting the immediate relief sought by Malala and his team. Instead, the judge set in motion a expedited legal process:
1. The petitioner (Malala) was directed to serve the National Assembly, the Senate, and other interested parties with the necessary documents by the close of business on September 30, 2024.
2. The respondents and interested parties were given until October 3, 2024, to respond to the allegations and serve their responses to the court.
Judge Mwamuye’s order stated:
“The Petitioner/Applicant shall serve the Chamber Summons, the Petition, and this Court Order on the Respondents and the Interested Parties by close of business today, 30/09/2024, and file an Affidavit(s) of Service in that regard by end of day 30/09/2024.”
Next Steps
The judge set October 7, 2024, as the date for the next hearing, stating:
“The matter shall be mentioned on 07/10/2024 for further directions and/or issuance of orders.”
Here’s what it takes to impeach a deputy president:
