Kenya's High Court upheld the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua on Monday, June 8, 2026 [1].
The ruling maintains the removal of the second-highest official in the country, confirming that the legislative branch possesses the constitutional authority to impeach a deputy president.
The court in Nairobi determined that Parliament acted within its constitutional mandate during the process [1, 2]. However, the judges also ruled that Gachagua's right to a fair hearing was violated during the proceedings [2, 3]. Because of this procedural breach, the court awarded Gachagua compensation [2, 3].
Legal representatives for the former deputy president expressed disagreement with the court's logic. One lawyer said, "The real absurdity is declaring that someone's rights were infringed, especially the right to fair hearing, then holding ..." [4].
The decision balances the legality of the impeachment outcome with the failure of the process. While the court acknowledged that the constitutional requirements for removal were met, it highlighted a failure to adhere to the fundamental principles of justice regarding the defendant's right to be heard [2, 3].
This ruling concludes a significant legal challenge to the parliamentary action that removed Gachagua from office. The court's decision to uphold the impeachment despite the procedural errors prevents Gachagua from being reinstated to his former position [1, 2].
“Kenya's High Court upheld the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.”
This ruling establishes a complex legal precedent in Kenya by decoupling the validity of a constitutional outcome from the fairness of the process used to achieve it. By upholding the impeachment while simultaneously awarding damages for rights violations, the court affirms the power of Parliament to remove top officials but signals that procedural shortcuts will carry a financial and legal penalty.
