Gachagua, Mutuse line up top lawyers for impeachment battle

Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua will first face his accusers alone, then decide whether he will call witnesses if he will appear before the Senate.

In a two-fold strategy by his lawyers, Rigathi will challenge the process, including public participation and the involvement of National Assembly speaker Moses Wetangu’ula owing to his utterances of the impeachment motion.

He will then tear down the correctness of the evidence produced by Eckomas Mwengi Mutuse to sway the tide against his accusers.

Gachagua will face three witnesses other than Mutuse.

.

Keep Reading business

•  Co-op Bank third-quarter profit jumps to Sh19b on higher income
•  I am not about to retire, Equity's James Mwangi says Premium
•  Report: Construction sector leads in mobile money use Premium
•  Delayed projects leave Kenya's blue economy limping Premium
•  Firms seek solutions in renewable energy to curb high cost of power

In his closing submissions before the Senate during Mwangaza’s impeachment, he reminded Senators the Socrates’ philosophy of being a judge.

“Distinguished Senators, the governor invites this house to be guided by a certain philosopher by the name Socrates to all persons sitting as a judge as you do. Four things belong to a judge: to listen courteously, to answer wisely, to consider soberly, and to decide impartially,” said Ongoya.

Senior lawyers Paul Nyamodi, Eric Gumbo, Dr Muthomi Thiankolu, and Peter Wanyama will prosecute Gachagua on behalf of Mutuse. The team, however, remained tight-lipped on who would do the honours of slaying Kenya’s second in command.

Nyamodi is a household name known for fronting soft yet lethal legal punches. He was the lead counsel in prosecuting former Supreme Court Judge Phillip Tunoi and has appeared for the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) during presidential and parliamentary election petitions.

Gumbo, on the other hand, was instrumental in President William Ruto's 2022 Presidential election petition win by appearing for the IEBC.

Dr Thiankolu, a law lecturer, specialises in evidence law, constitutional, and administrative law. He worked at the president's office, where he designed the architecture of the Kenyan government under the 2010 Constitution. Thiankolu prosecuted Kawira Mwangaza’s impeachment motion, which was rejected by the Senate last year.

In the meantime, the Senate and National Assembly have entrusted internal lawyers and outsiders to ensure that the 18 cases filed challenging the impeachment are terminated at the preliminaries.

Josephat Kuyoni and Mercy Thanji are appearing for both houses in the case filed by Gachagua. Other lawyers cited as being part of those entrusted to ensure that Gachagua is left with Parliament for a roast include Moses Kipkogei who was also key in defending IEBC in the last presidential election petition pitting Dr William Ruto against Raila Odinga.

There are 18 cases in total challenging Gachagua’s impeachment. From the objections before the High Court, the strategy is to ensure all the cases are terminated before being substantively heard.

In its response, the Senate argues that the cases are premature.

“Parliament may either confirm or reject the proposed removal of the Deputy President from office, and as such, the court's jurisdiction at this juncture cannot be properly invoked. The court's jurisdiction should and ought only to be invoked after Parliament has made its final determination on the substance and propriety of the charges against the Deputy President by voting to either approve the removal or to dismiss the charges brought forth.

In the event that parliament does not impeach the Deputy President, the proceedings before the court would amount to an abuse of the court process,” the response filed by Thanji reads in part.

On the other hand, the National Assembly hinges on its arguments that the cases should be struck out on the separation of powers principle.

It argues that the issues raised by Gachagua should be heard by Parliament first before the courts determine them. According to the lower house, the battles are unripe for judges to entertain.

At the same time, it asserts that the High Court has no powers to hear disputes arising from the impeachment of a Deputy President.

“Article 165 [3] [c] of the Constitution provides that the High Court has no jurisdiction to hear or determine a dispute relating to the removal of the President or the Deputy President from office on grounds of incapacity. By implication and for the same constitutional reasons, the High Court has no jurisdiction to determine the removal of the Deputy President by impeachment under Article 150 of the Constitution,” argued Kuyoni.

President Ruto is said to have his legal team monitoring the impeachment process. They are said to be part of Mutuse's team.