NAIROBI, Kenya — Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has withdrawn a High Court petition challenging the process that led to his impeachment in October 2024, saying the case has been overtaken by events.
The withdrawal of Constitutional Petition E522 of 2024 narrows his legal battle to an appeal against a separate High Court judgment that upheld his removal from office despite finding that his right to a fair hearing had been violated.
Gachagua’s lawyers confirmed the development on Wednesday, November 4, 2026, saying the decision was intended to avoid pursuing legal arguments that had already been considered in related proceedings.
The legal team said it would concentrate its efforts on the appeal pending before the Court of Appeal, where Gachagua is challenging the June 8, 2026 judgment.
“Clients or petitioners have a right to withdraw their matters at the end of time, and this is exactly what the petitioner in E522 has done. The petitioner, as you know, is the second Deputy President, Rigathi Gachagua,” the lawyers said.
His lawyer Victor Swanya said the issues raised in the withdrawn petition substantially overlapped with those addressed in another case, making it unnecessary to continue pursuing both matters.
The move does not amount to Gachagua conceding the legality of his impeachment. His legal team maintains that the appeal remains active and will be used to challenge the High Court’s findings.
Why Gachagua filed the petition in 2024
Petition E522 of 2024 was filed before the Senate completed the impeachment process against Gachagua.
It challenged the constitutionality of the proceedings initiated by the National Assembly, with his lawyers arguing that the process was rushed, politically motivated and conducted without adequate public participation.
The petition also raised questions about procedural fairness and whether Parliament had complied with constitutional requirements governing the removal of a Deputy President.
On October 11, 2024, High Court Judge Lawrence Mugambi found that the petition raised substantial constitutional questions and referred it to Chief Justice Martha Koome for consideration of an expanded bench.
The Chief Justice subsequently appointed a three-judge bench comprising Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima and Freda Mugambi to hear the dispute alongside related petitions.
The court consolidated six petitions challenging the impeachment process, with E522 designated as the lead file.
Gachagua had sought conservatory orders to stop the parliamentary process, but the courts declined to halt the impeachment proceedings. The Senate eventually voted to uphold his removal on October 17, 2024.
High Court upheld impeachment but awarded Gachagua KSh50 million
The most significant development in the legal dispute came on June 8, 2026, when the three-judge bench delivered its judgment on consolidated petitions challenging Gachagua’s impeachment.
The court declined to overturn the Senate’s resolution removing him from office, effectively upholding the impeachment.
However, the judges found that Gachagua’s right to a fair hearing had been violated when the Senate declined to grant an adjournment despite his absence from the proceedings.
The court also affirmed the need for Parliament to enact a dedicated statutory framework governing the impeachment of a Deputy President under Article 150 of the Constitution.
In its final orders, the bench awarded Gachagua KSh50 million in constitutional damages, payable by the Senate, to vindicate the Constitution, restore his dignity and deter future violations.
The judgment therefore recognised procedural violations but did not invalidate the final decision to remove him from office.
That distinction forms a central part of the legal argument Gachagua is now pursuing before the Court of Appeal.
Gachagua shifts focus to Court of Appeal
Gachagua has maintained his challenge to the June judgment, arguing that the High Court should not have upheld his impeachment after finding that his constitutional rights were violated.
His legal team filed an appeal challenging the judgment, while seeking to preserve findings made in his favour, including the declaration that his right to a fair hearing was infringed and the KSh50 million compensation award.
In August, Vivid Voice News reported that Gachagua had formally lodged the appeal, arguing that the High Court erred in finding that the impeachment could stand despite the procedural violations.
The appeal is expected to examine the relationship between Parliament’s constitutional powers to impeach a Deputy President, the right to a fair hearing and the extent to which courts can intervene in completed impeachment proceedings.
Also Read: Gachagua says he could relocate to US if opposition loses 2027 election
The legal team said the Court of Appeal is expected to give further directions on November 19, 2026.
The outcome of the appeal could have wider implications for the constitutional procedures governing the removal of a Deputy President and the protection of the rights of public officers facing impeachment.
Article 75 raises questions over Gachagua’s political ambitions
The legal dispute also carries political implications as Gachagua positions himself among opposition figures seeking to challenge President William Ruto in the 2027 General Election.
One of the constitutional provisions likely to feature in discussions about his eligibility for public office is Article 75(3) of the Constitution.
The provision states that a person dismissed or otherwise removed from office for contravening the conduct requirements under Article 75(1), or the specified provisions of Articles 76, 77 and 78(2), is disqualified from holding any other State office.
However, the provision does not automatically disqualify every public officer who has been impeached or removed from office.
Its application depends on whether the removal was for a contravention covered by the relevant constitutional provisions and the applicable legal findings.
Gachagua’s impeachment involved allegations of constitutional violations, including claims relating to his conduct as Deputy President. However, the High Court’s June 2026 judgment upheld his removal while making specific findings about procedural fairness.
The question of whether Article 75(3) applies to his circumstances, and its implications for any future presidential candidacy, would require a determination based on the relevant constitutional provisions and court findings.
For now, Gachagua’s withdrawal of Petition E522 removes one strand of his legal challenge but leaves the appeal against the High Court judgment unresolved.
His political ambitions and the legal consequences of his impeachment are therefore likely to remain subjects of scrutiny as the 2027 election approaches.
