Lawyers for Rigathi Gachagua question discrepancies between the ruling delivered in court and the version served to parties. Breaking It Down NAIROBI, Kenya, Jun 14 – A legal dispute surrounding the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has taken a new twist after his lawyers raised concerns over an alleged discrepancy between the judgment delivered by the High Court and the certified copy issued to parties. In a letter to the
06/14/26 • 3 Views
Lawyers for Rigathi Gachagua question discrepancies between the ruling delivered in court and the version served to parties.
📻 Breaking It Down
NAIROBI, Kenya, Jun 14 – A legal dispute surrounding the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has taken a new twist after his lawyers raised concerns over an alleged discrepancy between the judgment delivered by the High Court and the certified copy issued to parties.
In a letter to the court registry, Gachagua’s legal team questioned what they termed an unexplained omission of 64 pages from the judgment delivered on June 8, 2026.
According to lawyer Ndegwa Njiru, Justice Erick Ogola informed advocates in court that the three-judge bench was delivering a 350-page ruling.
📌 What You Need to Know
However, parties were later served with a version comprising 286 pages.
“On June 8, 2026, at approximately 12:30 PM, during the delivery of H.E. Rigathi Gachagua’s impeachment judgment, Hon. Justice Erick Ogola informed advocates present that the court was delivering a 350-page verdict. However, the parties were subsequently served with a judgment consisting of 286 pages. This means the judgment falls short by 64 pages,” Njiru stated.
He further posed a series of questions seeking clarification on the discrepancy, asking what happened to the missing pages, whether any alterations were made, who authorised them, and who stands to benefit from the changes.
The petition arises from the judgment delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Anthony Mrima, Freda Mugambi, and Erick Ogola in consolidated constitutional petitions challenging Gachagua’s impeachment.
The bench, after nearly 10 hours of proceedings in open court, upheld the impeachment, finding that both the National Assembly and the Senate acted within their constitutional mandates in removing Gachagua from office.
The judges ruled that while courts retain authority to interpret the Constitution and examine whether legal thresholds were met during impeachment, they cannot reverse a completed removal once constitutional procedures have been concluded.
📰 Source: Capital FM Kenya






