“That Is a Constitutional Coup" Gachagua Announces His Next Move as He Tears Into Three-Judge Ruling

Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has sharply criticized the ruling delivered by a three-judge bench of the High Court regarding his impeachment and removal from office.

Speaking after reviewing the judgment with his lawyers, Gachagua described the decision as “unconstitutional” and “full of contradictions that are obvious to Kenyans.”

Gachagua said he would appeal to the Court of Appeal, challenging what he called a self-contradictory decision that undermines fundamental constitutional rights.

On Monday, the three High Court judges upheld his removal from office but stated that the Senate had violated his rights by refusing to postpone proceedings when he had been hospitalized.

“It is difficult to understand how the three-judge bench can identify actions that were unconstitutional and yet still conclude that the process was valid. That contradiction insults the intelligence of Kenyans who followed this case,” he said.

Gachagua insisted that the impeachment process involved clear violations of his fundamental rights, citing Articles 25, 47, and 50 of the Kenyan Constitution, which guarantee fair hearing and due process.

According to him, the court acknowledged that he was not given an adequate opportunity to defend himself, a flaw that should invalidate the entire impeachment process.

He argued that once the right to a fair hearing is violated, all resulting actions should automatically be nullified.

Start Trading Forex in Minutes – Open Your Account

Learn as you go with an intuitive platform, built for new and pro traders. Benefit from lightning-fast execution, low commission and advanced tools. Between 75-95% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading Online Forex/CFDs.

IC Markets

by TaboolaSponsored Links

“Under the Constitution, especially Article 47, everyone is entitled to a fair process. The court itself admitted that my right to be heard was violated. At that point, the entire process should have been canceled. It was not lawful,” he said.

He added that the judges’ decision to uphold the outcome of the process despite identifying constitutional defects was “contrary to the duty of the court” under Article 165 of the Constitution.

“It is astonishing to see a court say that the right to be heard was violated, yet still uphold the outcome of that same process. That is an inexplicable constitutional contradiction,” he added.

Gachagua described the process as a “constitutional coup,” alleging that it was a scheme designed to remove him from office through unlawful means.

He said the entire process collapsed the moment the court acknowledged violations of his rights.