Kenya’s Deputy President Challenges High Court’s Authority in Impeachment Battle

In a twist of events in Kenya’s political circles, the deputy president Rigathi Gachagua has sought to block his impeachment process. Through a petition filed with the Court of Appeal on Monday, October 28th, Gachagua is seeking to stay further proceedings at the High Court claiming that recent decisions are fundamentally flawed. The decision was made as the last step in the heated process that was going on between the different branches of law and has become a subject of heated debates as well as the concern of many citizens across the country owing to the issue of judicial sovereignty.

Constitutional Authority Under Scrutiny

Gachagua has assured Kenyans that his legal team, led by renowned lawyer John Njomo, will challenge the constitutionality of the three-judge bench hearing the impeachment case. They can hardly question the appointing authority of Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu on the appointment of Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima, and Frida Mugambi without the express approval of Chief Justice Martha Koome.

The petition elaborately lists various articles of the constitution that are relevant, including Articles 25, 27, 47, 48, 50 (1), and 260, the petitioners are of the view that the only person who can appoint the judges is the Chief Justice. According to Gachagua’s team, the current regime of bench appointment violates Article 165(4) of the Constitution and this is a clear mischievous misinterpretation of legal provisions.

Keep Reading

• Africa Elections 2024: Will New Leadership Bring Lasting Peace?
• Kenyan Court Blocks New Deputy President Appointment
• South Africa’s Emotional Victory: A Historic Win Over Australia Secures Women’s T20 World Cup Final Spot

Judicial Panel Defends Appointment

The three-judge panel has lately sought to justify the formation of the panel, with Justice Mrima being in charge of arguing the case. The panel also affirmed that the Deputy Chief Justice has administrative powers to assume the powers of the Chief Justice for a certain period when this becomes necessary.

While Gachagua awaits the Court of Appeal’s decision on the requested injunction this case remains another reminder of the tension between judicial business and constitutional law. The decision of this appeal can have a major bearing on other related appeals, particularly those concerning the appointment of judges and administrative jurisdiction in Kenya.