Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has found himself at the center of a political storm as an impeachment debate looms in the National Assembly. Gachagua, known for his assertive demeanor, faces accusations of corruption and fraudulent property acquisition, charges he vehemently denies. At a press conference on Monday, just ahead of the scheduled debate, the deputy president delivered a strong defense, asserting that the allegations are fabricated and part of a political witch hunt aimed at discrediting his leadership.
The impeachment motion, brought forth by Kibwezi West MP Mwengi Mutuse, has garnered significant attention, with 291 lawmakers in the National Assembly supporting its movement to public participation across all 47 counties. The motion, which paints Gachagua as corrupt and accuses him of using his position to amass wealth through questionable means, will be debated on Tuesday, a moment Gachagua describes as one of the most shameful acts in the history of the House. He maintains that the charges are based on misinformation, political vendettas, and a misunderstanding of his late brother’s will.
Defending His Assets: “They Belonged to My Late Brother”
At the heart of the impeachment motion are claims that Gachagua acquired several properties through corrupt means after assuming office as deputy president in 2022. The properties mentioned include the Olive Garden Hotel, Vipingo Beach Resort, Queens Gate Apartment, and Lang’ata Highrise Flats. Gachagua, however, refuted these accusations, stating that these assets were not acquired recently, but rather were inherited from his late brother, James Nderitu Gachagua, who passed away in 2017 after battling pancreatic cancer.
“In his will, my late brother bequeathed his properties, assets, and cash to me and other executors, including Mwai Mathenge and lawyer Njoroge,” Gachagua explained during the press conference. “Mutuse claims I acquired these properties after becoming deputy president in 2022, despite the fact that my brother died in 2017.”
According to Gachagua, his role as executor of his brother’s estate included managing and possibly selling some of these assets, a responsibility that he says has been taken out of context by his political opponents. He cited the sale of the Olive Garden Hotel as an example of such transactions, clarifying that the funds from this sale were part of the inheritance, not ill-gotten gains.
The Mosquito Net Scandal: Eight Years Ago, Not Recent
Another key issue that has emerged in the impeachment motion is the rehashing of a controversial mosquito net tender in which Gachagua’s son was implicated. Critics have attempted to link Gachagua to the failed bid, alleging that the deputy president used his influence to interfere with the tendering process at the Kenya Medical Supplies Authority (KEMSA). However, Gachagua was quick to dismantle this narrative, explaining that the scandal occurred long before he became deputy president, dating back eight years.
The deputy president clarified that the company involved, Shobika Impex Limited, had appointed Crystal Kenya as their local agent to oversee logistics and supplies at the ports of entry. His son, acting on behalf of Crystal Kenya, had contacted KEMSA to inquire about the status of a bid bond worth Ksh. 500 million after the tender process did not succeed. The matter escalated when the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) seized the funds while conducting an investigation into the tender.
Gachagua admitted to intervening by contacting KEMSA after learning about the impasse, but stressed that his involvement was purely to resolve the issue of the bid bond being held up. He further revealed that the EACC had closed the case and returned the funds, stating that no evidence of wrongdoing was found.
“The matter was investigated, and the bid bond was eventually returned. There was no corruption here, just an attempt by my son to recover what was rightfully due to Crystal Kenya,” Gachagua asserted.
Criticizing the Public Participation Process: “It Was Shoddy and Misleading”
In addition to defending himself against the corruption allegations, Gachagua took aim at the recently concluded public participation process that sought Kenyans’ opinions on his proposed impeachment. Public participation is a key component of Kenya’s legislative process, allowing citizens to weigh in on matters of national interest. However, Gachagua dismissed the exercise as poorly executed and designed to mislead the public.
According to the deputy president, the accusations presented during the public participation process were framed in highly technical, legalistic language that the average Kenyan would struggle to understand. Furthermore, Gachagua claimed that his own responses to the allegations were not included in the materials provided to the public, skewing the process against him from the outset.
“The public participation was a shoddy exercise that most Kenyans couldn’t comprehend. The accusations were presented in highly legalistic language, making it difficult for people to make an informed decision,” Gachagua said. “Additionally, my response wasn’t included in the materials provided to the public.”
Gachagua’s criticism of the process reflects his belief that the impeachment motion is part of a coordinated effort to undermine his credibility and remove him from office through unfair means. He described the public participation as a mere formality designed to rubber-stamp the impeachment motion rather than a genuine effort to gather public opinion.
Preparing for Trial: A Legal Team Led by Paul Mwite
As Gachagua prepares to defend himself before the National Assembly, he has assembled a legal team led by prominent lawyer Paul Mwite, known for his experience in handling high-profile cases. The deputy president’s legal strategy will focus on dismantling the allegations of corruption and fraud, while highlighting the flaws in the impeachment process itself.
Gachagua remains confident that he will prevail in the impeachment trial, which he sees as a test of Kenya’s democratic values. He warned that if the impeachment proceeds, it will set a dangerous precedent, allowing democratically elected leaders to be removed from office based on “fabrications” and politically motivated attacks.
“This Tuesday impeachment will be the most shameful act in the history of the House,” Gachagua declared. “Legislators will attempt to remove a democratically elected leader based on fabrications.”
The outcome of the trial could have significant implications for Kenya’s political landscape, especially for Gachagua’s future as deputy president. While the impeachment motion has gathered substantial support, Gachagua’s allies have rallied behind him, describing the process as an abuse of parliamentary power. With public opinion divided and the political stakes high, the trial is expected to be a fiercely contested affair.
Conclusion
Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s defense against the impeachment motion hinges on his ability to prove that the allegations of corruption and fraudulent property acquisition are unfounded. By pointing to his late brother’s will and refuting claims of recent wrongdoing, Gachagua seeks to clear his name and retain his position in the government. However, the political forces arrayed against him are formidable, and the outcome of Tuesday’s trial remains uncertain.
Regardless of the verdict, Gachagua’s case underscores the complexities of Kenyan politics, where accusations of corruption can be used as both a tool for accountability and a weapon for political vendettas. As the trial unfolds, it will serve as a litmus test for the integrity of Kenya’s democratic institutions and the future of its political leadership.
