A fresh legal battle is brewing following the filing of a petition at the Eldoret High Court by lawyer Morara Omoke, seeking to prevent Chief Justice Martha Koome from swearing in a new Deputy President if the Senate upholds the impeachment of the current Deputy President, Rigathi Gachagua. The petition, certified as urgent, raises multiple constitutional concerns surrounding the impeachment process, and Omoke argues that the ousting of Gachagua has been plagued by procedural flaws, lack of public participation, and violations of constitutional provisions.
This legal move comes in the wake of the impeachment motion passed by the National Assembly on October 1, 2024, after 281 Members of Parliament voted in favor of Gachagua’s removal. The impeachment was initiated by Hon. Mutuse Eckomas Mwengi, Member of Parliament for Kibwezi West Constituency. The motion accuses Gachagua of various infractions, including failure to promote national unity and making inflammatory public statements. However, Omoke’s petition raises deeper concerns regarding the legitimacy of the impeachment process, which could have profound implications for the nation’s governance and constitutional order.
Background of the Impeachment Motion
Rigathi Gachagua, the Deputy President of Kenya, has been a central figure in President William Ruto’s administration since taking office in September 2022. However, his tenure has not been without controversy. Gachagua has repeatedly clashed with political opponents, particularly those from regions outside Mt. Kenya, his political base. He has been accused of making statements that undermine national cohesion, a key concern raised in the impeachment motion.
Hon. Mutuse Eckomas Mwengi, who tabled the motion, accused Gachagua of divisive rhetoric, particularly his defense of the Mt. Kenya region’s interests over national concerns. Gachagua’s active role in spearheading reforms in sectors such as coffee, milk, and tea—industries central to the Mt. Kenya economy—has been praised by some, but viewed by critics as pandering to his regional constituency at the expense of national unity. The impeachment motion also alleges that Gachagua has failed to adequately perform his role as Deputy President, with accusations that he has sidelined himself from key government functions.
Despite these charges, Gachagua’s supporters argue that the impeachment is politically motivated, intended to weaken his influence and undermine his standing in the government. Omoke’s petition reflects this sentiment, claiming that the impeachment process was conducted without following proper legal procedures, and that it poses a serious threat to Kenya’s democratic and constitutional order.
Grounds for the Petition
The crux of Omoke’s petition lies in the alleged irregularities surrounding the collection of signatures from Members of Parliament in support of the impeachment motion. According to Omoke, the process was riddled with coercion, bribery, and forgery. He contends that lawmakers were threatened with the suspension of constituency development projects if they did not endorse the impeachment motion. Omoke also presented evidence suggesting that several signatures were forged, including those of Mwala MP Vincent Musyoka and MPs Emmanuel Wangwe, Bernard Shinali, Lilian Siyoi, and Paul K. Chebor.
The petition also raises the issue of inadequate public participation, a fundamental principle enshrined in the Kenyan Constitution. Omoke argues that the impeachment of a Deputy President, an elected official, must be a people-driven process involving broad consultation with citizens across the country. He contends that Hon. Mutuse Mwengi failed to engage the public adequately before initiating the impeachment process, thus violating constitutional requirements for public participation in key national decisions.
Moreover, Omoke points to statements made by high-ranking officials that indicate the impeachment was a foregone conclusion long before the motion was tabled in Parliament. He cites an announcement by National Assembly Deputy Speaker Gladys Boss on September 23, 2024, in which she expressed her intention to lead the impeachment drive. Omoke also referenced remarks made by National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetangula during a church function in Machakos County, where he publicly supported Gachagua’s removal before the motion had even been debated in the House.
These events, Omoke argues, demonstrate a lack of neutrality and objectivity in the impeachment process, further undermining its legitimacy. He also raises concerns about the potential consequences of Gachagua’s removal, warning that it could lead to political instability and even violence, similar to the post-election unrest experienced in Kenya in 2007.
Seeking Conservatory Orders
In response to these concerns, Omoke’s petition seeks several key legal remedies. Most notably, he has requested conservatory orders preventing Chief Justice Martha Koome, or anyone acting under her instructions, from swearing in a new Deputy President in the event that the Senate upholds Gachagua’s impeachment. Under Article 149(1) of the Kenyan Constitution, the Deputy President is supposed to remain in office unless removed through a legally sound process. Omoke argues that the current impeachment process is fundamentally flawed, and therefore Gachagua should be allowed to continue discharging his duties as Deputy President until the legal issues raised in his petition are resolved.
Omoke has also called for the petition to be consolidated with other similar cases related to the impeachment, and for the President of Kenya, William Ruto, to file an affidavit stating whether he has any complaints against Gachagua. Furthermore, he has requested that the case be referred to Chief Justice Koome for the appointment of a three-judge bench to hear the matter, given its constitutional significance and the broader public interest.
Broader Implications for National Unity
The petition filed by Omoke touches on broader issues of national unity and the role of the Deputy President in Kenyan politics. Gachagua has been a polarizing figure, and his impeachment has sparked debate about the balance of power between different regions and ethnic groups in Kenya. His defense of Mt. Kenya interests, while praised by his supporters, has been criticized by opponents as promoting regionalism at the expense of national cohesion.
The case also raises important questions about the constitutional process for removing elected officials from office. While the Constitution provides mechanisms for impeachment, these processes must adhere to principles of fairness, transparency, and public participation. If Omoke’s allegations of forgery, bribery, and threats are proven true, it would cast serious doubt on the integrity of the impeachment process and could set a dangerous precedent for future political disputes.
Conclusion
As the legal battle over Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s impeachment unfolds, the outcome of Omoke’s petition could have far-reaching implications for Kenya’s political landscape. At its core, the case challenges the constitutionality of the impeachment process and raises concerns about the erosion of democratic principles in the country. By seeking to block Chief Justice Koome from swearing in a new Deputy President, Omoke aims to ensure that any transition of power is conducted in a manner that respects the rule of law and safeguards national unity.
The Eldoret High Court’s decision on the matter will be closely watched, not only for its legal implications but also for its potential impact on Kenya’s political stability in the months and years to come.
