Gachagua Moves to Court of Appeal Over Ruling by Three Judge Bench
Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, who is facing impeachment, filed a petition with the Court of Appeal on Monday, October 28, requesting to halt the ongoing High Court proceedings and expressing opposition to the three-judge panel presiding over the case.
Gachagua has urged the Appellate Court to suspend the impeachment hearing at the High Court, citing dissatisfaction with a previous ruling where the judges did not declare that Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu acted unlawfully by appointing the panel.
Through his attorney, John Njomo, Gachagua argued that the rulings were flawed, erroneous, and misinterpreted Article 165 (4) of the Constitution.
He further argued that Articles 25, 27, 47, 48, 50 (1), and 260 of the Constitution exclusively empower the Chief Justice to assemble a bench, asserting that no other judicial officer holds such authority.
“The applicant contends that the ruling not only misinterprets Article 165 (4) but also violates Articles 25, 27, 47, 48, 50 (1), and 260, as the Constitution solely grants the Chief Justice of Kenya the power to appoint and assign judges, leaving no room for the Deputy Chief Justice to do so,” the petition stated.
ALSO READ:
- Raila Ally Breaks Silence After Ruto-Uhuru Meeting
- Gachagua Close Ally Karungo Wa Thang’wa Accepts Ruto’s CBS Award
- Gov’t to Release Ksh.32 Billion to Counties Next Week – DP Kindiki
- High Court Strikes Down Ruto-Raila 2023 IEBC Amendment Bill
- Kenya Water Towers Agency Dissolved: Government Moves to Streamline State Corporations
The petition further described the actions and decisions of the contested panel as “incorrect, unlawful, and procedurally flawed.”
According to Gachagua’s legal team, failure by the Court of Appeal to rule in his favor would infringe on his right to a fair hearing.
He emphasized the urgency of his appeal, asserting that without intervention, his case could be nullified.
“Without the issuance of these orders, any delay may lead to an irreversible prejudice against the Applicant’s rights to a fair trial and hearing, ultimately rendering Petition E565 of 2024 meaningless, futile, and void,” the petition added.
Previously, justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima, and Frida Mugambi ruled that Mwilu acted within her authority when she constituted the panel on behalf of Chief Justice Martha Koome.
Justice Mrima, delivering the ruling, cited Article 165 (4) of the Constitution, which he interpreted as allowing the Deputy Chief Justice to act in the Chief Justice’s stead when the Chief Justice is unable to perform such duties under specific circumstances, as argued in Gachagua’s challenge.
Gachagua Moves to Court of Appeal Over Ruling by Three Judge Bench
