Why Gachagua’s Impeachment Fight Is Not Over, Despite The Supreme Court Ruling

By Suleiman Mbatiah

The Supreme Court has dismissed two consolidated applications linked to the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, dealing a setback to his legal strategy while leaving the core challenge to his removal unresolved.

‎‎In a ruling delivered earlier today, the apex court declined to grant interim relief sought by Gachagua and the National Assembly, finding that neither application met the threshold for summary determination. The court made no orders on costs.

‎‎The decision narrows Gachagua’s options at the Supreme Court and shifts the focus back to the lower courts, where the substantive questions surrounding his impeachment are still pending.

‎‎The dispute traces back to October 2024, when the National Assembly impeached Gachagua. Several petitions were subsequently filed in the High Court, challenging both the parliamentary process and efforts to stop the Senate from proceeding with the impeachment.

‎‎Given the weight of the constitutional issues raised, the cases were referred to special High Court benches under Article 165(4) of the Constitution. That move triggered a separate legal battle, with Gachagua questioning who had the authority to empanel such benches and whether the judges appointed could lawfully sit on his case.

‎‎After losing those challenges at the High Court, the matter moved to the Court of Appeal. The appellate court held that the power to empanel High Court benches rests with the Chief Justice, but that the Deputy Chief Justice may only exercise that authority in clearly demonstrated and publicly communicated exceptional circumstances.

‎‎That finding prompted the National Assembly to appeal to the Supreme Court, with Gachagua filing a cross-appeal. However, the apex court drew a sharp distinction between the procedural dispute before it and the impeachment itself.

‎‎“For purposes of clarity, it is the empanelment that is in question in the appeal before the Supreme Court and not the challenge of the impeachment proceedings concerning Hon. Gachagua, which is still pending before the High Court,” the judges stated.‎

‎Gachagua had asked the court to stay proceedings before the Court of Appeal, strike out the National Assembly’s appeal, and expunge parts of the record. The Supreme Court rejected those requests, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to halt High Court proceedings.

‎‎“The Supreme Court can only stay proceedings before the Court of Appeal and not the High Court as prayed for,” the court ruled.

‎‎The judges also declined to remove documents Gachagua wanted struck out, noting that they were central to the dispute and already properly before the lower courts. On the National Assembly’s application to strike out Gachagua’s notice of cross-appeal, the court reached the same conclusion, finding that the issue could not be resolved summarily.

‎‎Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed both applications with no orders as to costs.

‎‎In practical terms, the outcome is a setback but not an end to Gachagua’s impeachment fight. He failed to secure a pause on proceedings in the lower courts and was unable to block the National Assembly’s appeal or prune the record at an early stage.

‎‎At the same time, the court made it clear that it was not pronouncing itself on the legality of his impeachment. The substantive petitions challenging the process remain alive before the High Court, and this ruling neither vindicates nor condemns the impeachment.

‎‎Politically and legally, the decision weakens Gachagua’s leverage in court-driven battles tied to his removal and signals that his path forward lies in full hearings rather than interim applications. He now awaits two outcomes: the Court of Appeal’s final word on judicial empanelment and the High Court’s eventual determination on the validity of his impeachment.

‎