Gachagua Challenges High Court’s Impeachment Ruling, Claims Lack Of Judges’ Signatures
A legal controversy has arisen over what appears to be a difference in a crucial court decision issued in a combined constitutional case involving former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua and other parties.
Gachagua’s lawyers have taken issue with the verdict shared with the parties in the matter heard and decided by the High Court’s three-judge bench of Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima, and Lady Justice Freda Mugambi.
The problem originates from what the lawyers claim are missing 64 pages of the ruling, which took nearly 10 hours to deliver on June 8, 2026.
Gachagua’s lawyers argue that during the delivery of the ruling in open court, Justice Ogola informed the advocates present that the court was delivering a 350-page verdict.
This is the most ironic part of Gachagua’s impeachment judgment. The court pointed out that quashing the impeachment would throw the country into absurdity essentially leaving Kenya with two Deputy Presidents.
The court failed to reason that if the impeachment of Rigathi… pic.twitter.com/Ta9tHgNncm— Thuranira (@Thuranira_1) June 12, 2026
If Senate denied Rigathi Gachagua a fair hearing, his impeachment is null and void, LSK President Charles Kanjama says. #FixingTheNationNTV @NationFmKE @EricLatiff @MariamBishar @blinkypenguin pic.twitter.com/3w4VO5ILGA— NTV Kenya (@ntvkenya) June 9, 2026
However, the parties were subsequently served with a judgment consisting of only 286 pages.
According to the lawyers, this creates a discrepancy of 64 missing pages, with no explanation provided for the difference between what was read in court and what was later issued in writing.
Gachagua’s lawyers argue that this raises questions about the ‘completeness and authenticity of the official judgment record’.
In their letter, the lawyers warned that any deviation undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.
Especially in a politically significant case involving multiple petitioners and state respondents, including the National Assembly and its speaker.
On 8th June, 2026, at approximately 12:30 PM, during the delivery of H.E. Rigathi Gachagua’s impeachment judgment, Hon. Justice Erick Ogola informed the advocates present that the court was delivering a 350-page verdict. However, the parties were subsequently served with a…— Ndegwa Njiru Adv. (@NjiruAdv) June 13, 2026
The matter now places pressure on the city registry to clarify whether the discrepancy is clerical, procedural, or substantive.
ALSO READ:
- US Deploys Military Personnel To Kenya For Ebola Facility Support
- Gov’t Vows To Continue With Imenti Forest Airstrip Despite Court Order
- Ruto Defends High NSSF Deductions, Claims Will Increase National Savings
- Israel Imposes Travel Bans on Kenya, THREE Other Countries Over Ebola Outbreak
- South Sudanese Businessman Abducted In Kenya Transported To, Held In Juba Military Base
This followed People’s Liberation Party (PLP) leader Martha Karua raising concerns about contradictory and inconsistent court rulings in politically sensitive cases, claiming that some judgments have failed to adhere strictly to the law.
Karua pointed to inconsistencies she said she personally experienced in court processes, including her 2017 Nyeri gubernatorial petition.
Karua further narrated how the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court handled her petition.
She noted that although some courts acknowledged procedural gaps and missing materials, the case was still ultimately dismissed.
Further, Gachagua’s legal team is now demanding immediate access to what they describe as the complete 350-page judgment as read in court.
Gachagua Challenges High Court’s Impeachment Ruling, Claims Lack Of Judges’ Signatures
