Court bursts into laughter after debate on whether Gachagua wants office back

Courtroom at Milimani during impeachment proceedings/SCREENGRAB

A light moment broke out in the High Court during proceedings in the impeachment case involving former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua after a debate emerged over whether he was seeking to return to office.

The laughter erupted during rejoinder submissions by Gachagua’s legal team before a three-judge bench led by Justice Eric Ogola.

The proceedings marked the fourth day of hearing in the petitions challenging aspects of Gachagua’s impeachment.

The moment began after lawyers representing Deputy President Kithure Kindiki raised concerns over arguments they believed suggested an attempt to reverse the impeachment and restore Gachagua to office.

In response, one of Gachagua’s lawyers sought to clarify the position of his client, insisting that the former Deputy President was not pursuing reinstatement.

“I need to make it clear. Our client has no interest in their client’s office,” the lawyer submitted.

He further told the court that Gachagua’s team had not asked the court to return him to office.

“We are not asking to be returned. I think I need to make that very clear. Don’t be 'threatened, haranguled' by people with all manner of horrors,” counsel said.

The remarks triggered amusement in court, prompting Justice Ogola to interject with a question that drew further laughter from lawyers and members of the public seated in the courtroom.

“Are you limiting our orders?” Justice Ogola posed.

The lawyer quickly responded that he was not attempting to restrict the powers of the court.

“I am not limiting your orders,” he replied.

Justice Ogola then added humorously: “But we can return.”

The courtroom burst into laughter once again before the lawyer responded in a similarly light tone.

“That will be a most happy surprise. We will receive all gifts, my lord,” counsel said, drawing more laughter across the courtroom.

The brief exchange temporarily lightened the mood in proceedings that have largely revolved around weighty constitutional questions surrounding Gachagua’s impeachment.

The hearing has seen lawyers representing Parliament, the Senate and other respondents defend the impeachment process as constitutional and procedurally sound.

This is while Gachagua’s legal team has challenged several aspects of the proceedings, including public participation, fair hearing and the handling of medical issues raised during the impeachment period.

Earlier in the proceedings, the Parliament defended the timelines followed during the impeachment, arguing that Article 145 of the Constitution provided strict timelines that Parliament was obligated to comply with.

Counsel for the National Assembly, Moses Kipkogei, told the court that impeachment proceedings were constitutionally time-bound and could not be delayed indefinitely.

The respondents also argued that Gachagua had been accorded adequate opportunity to defend himself before both the National Assembly and Senate, including appearing in person with a team of lawyers.

Meanwhile, Gachagua’s legal team has maintained that aspects of the process violated constitutional safeguards and due process requirements.

After the lawyer concluded his submissions, Justice Ogola informed parties that the bench would not proceed further with the matter today.

“We are not able to proceed beyond now. We will adjourn the matter to May 22 at 10am,” the judge directed.