Rigathi Gachagua Takes His Impeachment Fight to the High Court

He was joined by his wife, Dorcas Rigathi, their two sons, and a team of lawyers as he walked into the building ready to present his case. This marked an important moment in a long-running dispute that started after parliament voted to remove him from his position more than a year earlier. Many Kenyans have followed the story closely because it involves questions about fairness in how top leaders are chosen and replaced.

Gachagua lost his job as Deputy President in October 2024, making him the first person in that role to face such a step in Kenya’s history. He has always maintained that the process was not carried out properly and included serious flaws, such as claims that money was offered to lawmakers to secure the votes needed for his ouster. His team argues that the entire procedure failed to respect basic rules set out in the constitution, including the right to a proper chance to defend himself. The current court session will look at these concerns along with several other requests from both sides, such as calls to pause certain official actions while the matter is decided.

The three judges assigned to the case—Justices Erick Ogolla, Anthony Mrima, and Freda Mugambi—will now give guidance on the next steps and listen to arguments about the main issues. These include how much authority parliament and the senate should have in such matters and whether the courts can step in to check if everything was done correctly. Earlier rulings had already caused some delays; last year an appeal court had set aside a previous decision on how the judges should be chosen, which pushed the hearing back. Supporters and observers see this as more than just one man’s battle—it touches on bigger ideas about keeping power in check and protecting the rules that hold the country’s leadership together.

Speaking to supporters the day before in Mombasa, Gachagua showed confidence that the judges would listen fairly and correct what he described as a wrongful decision. He explained that he had discussed the court appearance with his children, who worried about the public embarrassment he had already suffered, but he felt it was necessary to stand up for what he believed was right. His legal team has prepared what they call a strong set of facts to show that the removal did not follow proper steps. As the hearing continues over the coming days, the outcome could have lasting effects on how future disputes between parliament and the executive branch are handled in Kenya.