The Supreme Court is poised to announce its decision today regarding the constitutional validity of the High Court bench that adjudicated petitions challenging the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.
A four-judge bench of the apex court will assess the legality of the three-judge High Court panel that handled the consolidated petitions stemming from Gachagua’s removal from office in October 2024.
Central to this legal dispute is whether Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu operated within constitutional parameters when she formed the bench in the absence of Chief Justice Martha Koome.
The three-judge panel, composed of Justices Anthony Mrima, Frida Mugambi, and Eric Ogola, was established in October 2024 and subsequently lifted conservatory orders that had temporarily suspended the impeachment process.
This pivotal decision allowed the impeachment proceedings to continue, leading to President William Ruto’s appointment of Kithure Kindiki as Deputy President.
Gachagua then sought recourse through the appellate courts, where his legal team contended that the empanelment was unconstitutional. They referenced Article 165(4) of the Constitution, asserting that the authority to constitute a High Court bench for matters of substantial constitutional importance resides solely with the Chief Justice.
On May 9, 2025, the Court of Appeal sided with this argument. A bench led by Court of Appeal President Daniel Musinga, alongside Justices Mumbi Ngugi and Fred Ochieng, ruled that DCJ Mwilu lacked the constitutional authority to appoint the bench.
The appellate court found no evidence suggesting that Mwilu was acting as Chief Justice at that time, nor did it identify any exceptional circumstances that would warrant her intervention.
As a result, the court invalidated the bench and instructed Chief Justice Koome to form a new one within 14 days.
Chief Justice Koome subsequently reappointed the same three judges to hear the consolidated petitions, a decision that reignited the ongoing legal contention.
In response, the National Assembly approached the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the Court of Appeal judgment and affirm the legality of Mwilu’s actions.
Gachagua filed a cross-appeal, urging the apex court to dismiss Parliament’s case.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling is anticipated to have profound implications for the future of the impeachment challenge.
In a separate legal matter, a Milimani court is set to render a decision today regarding the longstanding robbery with violence case linked to the tragic killing of former Kabete MP George Muchai.
This case comes before Milimani Chief Magistrate Lucas Onyina following a recent High Court ruling that declined to halt the ongoing criminal proceedings, thereby allowing the trial court to reach its conclusion.
Earlier this week, High Court Judge Lawrence Mugambi dismissed an application from the accused seeking to stay the proceedings on constitutional grounds.
The case pertains to a robbery allegedly committed on the night of February 7, 2015, involving complainants Gladys Waithera and Irene Muthoni on Nairobi’s Kenyatta Avenue.
Notably, this robbery occurred on the same night that Muchai, along with his two bodyguards, Samuel Kailikia and Samuel Matanta, and his driver, Stephen Wambugu, were shot dead in a separate incident.
The accused—Eric Isabwa, Raphael Kimani, Mustapha Kimani, Stephen Astiva, Jane Wanjiru, Margaret Njeri, and Simon Wambugu—face multiple counts of robbery with violence involving several complainants.
All accused individuals have denied the charges, arguing that the charge sheets were unconstitutional and asserting that their prosecution under Sections 295, 296, and 297 of the Penal Code was unlawful. They maintained that the alleged constitutional defects warranted a halt to the trial.
In his ruling, Justice Mugambi emphasized that granting blanket orders to stop robbery with violence trials or directing the release of accused persons, even in light of constitutional questions, would be impractical and disruptive to the justice system.
